Who Benefits From Federalism Claims in Federal Court?

Abstract Debates about the virtues or vices of American-style federalism are as old as the Republic. While scholars generally agree that American federalism facilitates multiple levels of political contestation, there is less agreement on the democratic implications of these multiple battlegrounds. This article focuses on an area that receives little attention among American politics scholars: federalism claims against national authority in federal courts. Situating American federalism within a larger framework of veto opportunities, this article analyzes challenges to congressional authority on federalism grounds in landmark Supreme Court cases from 1800 to 2018. Contrary to the standard legal narratives about federalism’s virtues, the most frequent beneficiaries of legal claims against congressional authority on federalism grounds appear to be economic elites challenging national economic regulation, taxation, and labor protections. A smaller, but substantial set of cases involves opponents of equal protection and other anti-discrimination laws. These findings have important implications for national democratic responsiveness and standard legal analyses of federalism’s democratic promise.