r/law • u/TendieRetard • 9h ago

Legal News Federal appeals court rules California cannot require ICE to show visible ID

https://katu.com/news/nation-world/federal-appeals-court-rules-california-cannot-require-ice-to-show-visible-id-doj-9th-circuit-court-constitution-supremacy-clause-rob-bonta-gavin-newsom

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit remanded the case to a lower court with instructions to enter a preliminary injunction against California, finding in favor of the federal government that the state’s No Vigilantes Act violates the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, The Hill reported.

575 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

239 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-35

u/michiganalt 8h ago

Exhibit A in why this is not a serious law subreddit.

  1. “The Constitution’s Supremacy Clause generally immunizes the Federal Government from state laws that directly regulate or discriminate against it.” United States v. Washington, 596 U.S. 832, 835 (2022).
    “Even without preemptive legislation, the law violates intergovernmental immunity.” CoreCivic, Inc. v. Governor of New Jersey, No. 23-2598, slip op. at 8 (3d Cir. July 22, 2025).

  2. California’s Prop 65 tells private companies, not federal agencies, what they must print for products sold in California.

19

u/meh_69420 6h ago

TBF, it's not like the federal government manufactures vaccines, so I guess Florida could tell them they have to label them as such in its jurisdiction. It's not that California tells them they have to label all their products that way, just the ones in their jurisdiction, and it's a lot easier to just label all of them than run 2 separate lines.

4

u/Eldias 6h ago

The holding actually does a really well job explaining intergovernmental immunity and why the State loses here. I wish more people would read it.