Nuclear power, technology and waste is a matter of national security. It’s a profoundly Federal matter. If VY is lying about environmental problems, there are federal agencies that can investigate and have the issues either taken care of, or have VY shut down. No?
While it might be profoundly federal as a matter of common sense, it is not necessarily as a matter of constitutional law. “National security” is not mentioned in the constitution.
Of course not, but still the issue remains. What was the state of Vermont trying to avoid in not going through the obvious channels in regards to existing nuclear statutes (both state and federal)?
No but “provide for the common defence” is.
By ‘allow’ I mean not superceded by the federal government. States are free to do anything not addressed by federal law already. But the issues arise when the state’s actions are contrary to the federal law. So it’s not an issue of permission, it’s a question of who gets the last word. Unless the Supreme Court throws out the federal law, it tends to win.
Well yes, that is the law. But the Constitution has numerous means of allowing federal law to be based on the Constitution, and in practice, this is used post hoc to disallow the state right, i.e., because the federal law is Constitutional, the Constitution disallows the state’s right.
I know that’s not how it was supposed to work, but I think it’s actually better this way. Otherwise a Constititional Amendment would be necessary to maintain a national law whenever the states conflicted. The result would be laws that are more difficult to change than they are now. And allowing states freedom to ignore federal law would lead to interminable disputes that stifle commerce, foster corruption, and readily deny Constitutional rights.