翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ New York University residence halls ・ New York University School of Law ・ New York University School of Medicine ・ New York University School of Professional Studies ・ New York University School of Social Work ・ New York University Shanghai ・ New York University Stern School of Business ・ New York University Tandon School of Engineering ・ New York Urban Professionals Athletic League ・ New York v. Belton ・ New York v. Connecticut ・ New York v. Ferber ・ New York v. Onofre ・ New York v. Quarles ・ New York v. Strauss-Kahn ・ New York v. United States ・ New York Vauxhall Gardens ・ New York Velodrome ・ New York virus ・ New York Voices ・ New York Volunteers ・ New York Wanderers ・ New York Water Taxi ・ New York Watercolor Club ・ New York Watercolor Society ・ New York Week in Review ・ New York Weekly ・ New York weevil ・ New York What Is Funky ・ New York Wheel Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク New York v. United States ： ウィキペディア英語版 New York v. United States ''New York v. United States'', 505 U.S. 144 (1992) was a decision of the United States Supreme Court. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, writing for the majority, found that the "Take Title" provision of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 exceeded Congress's power under the Commerce Clause. ==Background== The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act was an attempt to imbue a negotiated agreement among the States with federal incentives for compliance. The problem of what to do with radioactive waste was a national issue complicated by the political reluctance of the states to deal with the problem individually. New York was a willing participant in the compromise, and after the Act was passed, it announced locations in the counties of Allegany and Cortland as potential places for waste storage. Public opposition in both counties was immediate and very determined, and eventually helped motivate New York to challenge the law. The Act provided three "incentives" for states to comply with the agreement. The first two incentives were held constitutional. The first incentive, "monetary" incentive, allowed states to collect gradually increasing surcharges for waste received from other States. The Secretary of Energy would then collect a portion of this income and redistribute it to reward states achieving a series of milestones in waste disposal. This was held to be within Congress's power under the Taxing and Spending Clause, and an "unexceptionable" exercise of that power. The second incentive, the "access" incentive, allowed states to reprimand states that missed certain deadlines by raising surcharges or eventually denying access to disposal at those state's facilities completely. This was held to be a permitted exercise of Congress's power under the Commerce Clause. The third incentive, requiring states to "take title" and assume liability for waste generated within their borders if they failed to comply, was held to be impermissibly coercive and a threat to state sovereignty, thereby violating the Tenth Amendment. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「New York v. United States」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.