Can the president get involved with state politics? such as if a governor creates a new law that the president doesn’t agree with, could the president veto the law?

27 comments

1. No. He can express dissatisfaction with the law, but has no authority to change it.

2. No. A suit can be brought against the state in federal court and if the law is deemed unconstitutional it can be struck down, but not because anyone simply doesn’t like it.

   States are not administrative districts. They have their own constitutions and are responsible for most of the law that impacts an Americans daily lives.

3. He has no power over a state law. He can try to convince congress to pass a bill that counteracts the state’s law.

4. The states are sovereign within their borders, so POTUS can’t really get involved unless there’s a state law which contradicts a federal law.

   Even then it would be a very bad look for POTUS to issue an executive order simply to overrule some law in any state.

   POTUS cannot veto laws at the state level, for reasons mentioned above.

5. No, the president can say he or she doesn’t like it and can take some actions depending on what it is. Like here in Texas, the state is enforcing a law it made that basically classifies gender affirming care for trans kids as child abuse, and is directing the state child welfare agency to investigate parents who have gotten that stuff for their kids. The Justice Department sued the state to try to block some aspects of the bill, and the Office of Civil Rights is helping defend families the state is trying to take to court. So, no undoing the law, but definitely there are ways to do things short of it.

6. First thing, governors and Presidents do not create laws. The state and federal congress do. Governors and Presidents either sign the bill into law, or they veto it. If they veto the bill, it takes 2/3 majority of the legislature to over rule the veto.

   No. If the state legislature passes a law and then signed by the Governor, anyone that disagrees with the law, claiming the law is unconstitutional, will challenge it in the state court to the state Supreme Court. If they still disagree with the state Supreme Court decision, They can then challenge to the federal court. All the way to the US Supreme Court.

7. The office of the President, by design, has very little power when it comes to creating law and affecting the
   governance of an individual state. Part of the “checks and balances” that are baked into American government.

8. First, governors do not create laws. They execute them. The state legislature makes them.

   The president has no power over the political working of the state legislatures or governors and they may pass any laws that are *permitted by the constitutions of the state and federal government*.

   States are not free to violate their own constitutions. Nor are they free to violate the federal constitution.

   The president doesn’t have any say in determining that. That is a question for the state or federal Supreme Court.

   Essentially the president has very little to zero impact on state law directly.

   Where the president can have impact is directing federal agencies that have significant impact on states. Considering some states, especially out west, have huge tracts of federal land, and all states receive tons of federal money for all sorts of things the federal government does have some “soft” power over the states. However, most of that must be done through federal legislation so it is congress that has most of that power.

   It was specifically set up this way so a unitary executive could not bully a sovereign state. Congress is much more likely to try to interfere directly with state government because it is filled with representatives from the states they represent.

   In short, the president does not have the power to direct any state legislative, executive, or judicial function. The president can use some federal executive powers to influence the actions of states but states are free to ignore that influence.

9. The short answer is no. The federal and state governments are separate sovereigns – meaning that the president can’t veto state laws.

   Now if a state law conflicts with the federal constitution it can be struck down by federal courts.

   There’s also the fact that the federal government can’t force states to enforce federal law. It’s why marijuana is illegal federally but legal in many states.

   So it’s complicated.

10. The president gets his power from the states, so there’s no mechanism for him to play in state politics, like there are mechanisms for the states to play around at the federal level (such as the governor appointment of congressmen if one has to end their term early)

11. Nope.

12. Not directly, but the federal government does try to bully states pretty regularly with threatening to pull federal funding on things and stuff like that.

13. That would defeat the entire purpose of state vs. federal law and invalidate one of this country’s founding ideals (small government).

14. So as other people have pointed out, the President and Governor don’t have that kind of power.

    They each have certain emergency powers and a great deal of influence, but the passing of laws falls upon the legislators.

    When it comes to disputes between state and federal legislators, the answer falls on the exact division of power set in the constitution.

    Broadly speaking, the federal government has authority over foreign affairs and disputes between states, while the state governments have authority over everything else.

    But one of the most important clauses of the constitution is know as the commerce clause. Basically, it says that the federal government can supersede state authority in matters of interstate commerce.

    The thing is, it can be argued that anything is involved in interstate commerce. A famous example was the Civil Rights Act, which was passed under the authority of the commerce clause.

    So when states feel that Congress is using their powers unjustly, they have the right to sue the federal government, and ultimately the decision as to who has the true authority in that scenario falls upon the Supreme Court.

15. The federal government can have influence over state laws but not directly impose them. One example is the minimum drinking age in the U.S. of 21 years old. The money to maintain highways comes from the federal government and a law passed in 1984 required states to either raise the drinking age to 21 or lose 10% of their annual highway funding. The states raised the age.

16. No, the most a president could do is sign an executive order or try to push a law through Congress and the Senate. States can also choose to disregard certain laws within their state (like how several states have made weed legal while it is still illegal on a federal level). Local government in the US has a lot of power which is why it is important that US citizens vote in local elections.

17. No, they cannot change a local or state law. They can express that they are unhappy and can start to put pressure on others to stop providing support and to also speak out against it, but they cannot directly make it change.

18. Our states are insular. As long as the law doesn’t conflict with federal precedence or the constitution the states can pass whatever they like.

    Cannabis is a prime example of state and federal laws conflicting. The states are the laboratories of democracy.

19. Assuming the law is Constitutional, the federal government doesn’t have a say in it. In the US states are sovereign entities and are actually where general police powers lie. The federal government is limited only to the authority the Constitution grants to it.

20. The President cannot veto a law passed by a state legislature but the President can do other things to affect the law. The President can direct the Department of Justice to challenge the law in court (Constitutional Challenge).

    I also see the Federal Government putting strings on federal money allocated to the states. Now, this is not directly the President doing it but he is part of the process. Real world example: In the 1980s (maybe earlier) each state had a different minimum drinking age. Some states it was 18, others 21. And there were variations in between. As I recall, my state allowed 18-20 year olds to buy cereal malt beverages (which was defined as beer with less than 5.0 % alcohol – so think 3.2 beer). Well there was a ton of political pressure put on the Federal Government about stopping drunk driving and the feds decided to tie federal highway dollars to this issue. The Feds decided to withhold the money unless the state increased the minimum drinking age to 21. And that is how every state in the Union now has a minimum drinking age of 21 and we have people under 21 getting fake IDs so they can go drinking at a bar while in college, or in the military.

21. The federal government can only invalidate a state law if it’s unconstitutional.

22. Unless, there is a Federal law that can override the enforcement of the state level law the President has no authority over s state law. Ex, Recreational marijuana is illegal at the Federal level but not in some states such as Colorado. So technically a Federal law enforcement agency such as the DEA can make an arrest for it in Colorado. (Though this is not really enforced in practice)

23. No, but the constitutionality of laws created at the state level can be challenged in the Supreme Court.

24. No.

25. No, he can’t dictate what state laws are. However, if a state law is actually in violation of federal law, the president can send in federal law enforcement to arrest people.

    This is true for marijuana, which is legal in several states, but illegal at the federal level. So if a president really wanted to, they can have federal law enforcement arrest people in states like Colorado for possession and distribution. Will a president actually do this though? I guess, it’s just that they will likely not win a second term.

26. Not exactly, but Federal law supersede state law. So there could be a law that effectively nullifies state government policy, but this would have to be passed by the federal senate and House of Representatives.

27. There are three levels of government – Federal, state, and local. The President deals with things at the Federal Level. Governors deal with things at the state level. Local governments are like counties and districts.

    The President can’t interfere with the states and their laws nor constitution. States do their own thing while the President does his thing.