Judicial branch · Landmark case
Printz v. United States
521 U.S. 898 (1997) · Opinion of the Court
What you should know
This page explains the Court’s holding in plain language.
The controlling document is the Court’s opinion.
The Court held that the federal government may not compel state or local law-enforcement officers to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. The interim provisions of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act that required local chief law-enforcement officers to conduct background checks on handgun purchasers violated the anti-commandeering principle implicit in the Constitution’s structure.
Background
The Brady Act imposed a five-day waiting period and background-check system for handgun purchases. Until a national instant-check system was ready, the Act required local officers to make a “reasonable effort” to ascertain whether a sale would be illegal. Sheriffs Jay Printz (Montana) and Richard Mack (Arizona) challenged that mandate. The Ninth Circuit upheld it; the Supreme Court reversed.
Printz, together with New York v.
United States, establishes the anti-commandeering doctrine: Congress may regulate individuals directly and may attach conditions to federal funds, but it may not order state executives or legislatures to implement federal regulatory schemes. The doctrine is a structural federalism rule that continues to shape cooperative-federalism design.
Vote and authorship
| Majority | Scalia, J. |
|---|---|
| Join | Rehnquist, C.J., O’Connor, Kennedy, Thomas |
| Concurrence | O’Connor, J.; Thomas, J. |
| Dissent | Stevens, J. (joined by Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer); Souter, J.; Breyer, J. (joined by Stevens) |
The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program.
Justice Scalia · Printz v. United States
How it fits in government
Federalism
Core anti-commandeering rule protecting state executive autonomy.
Legislative branch
Constrains how Congress may structure federal-state regulatory programs.
State & local government
Shields local officers from being conscripted as federal agents.
Official records visitors may need
Related research paths
New York v. United States
Companion anti-commandeering case
NFIB v. Sebelius
Later Spending Clause coercion limit
Tenth Amendment
Structural backdrop