Printz v. United States

The Court held that Congress cannot commandeer state officers to administer federal regulatory programs.

Overview

The Brady Act required local sheriffs to conduct handgun purchase background checks until the federal system launched. Sheriff Jay Printz of Montana challenged the mandate. Justice Scalia, for a 5-4 majority, held that commandeering state executive officers violates the Constitution's structure of dual sovereignty, which reserves to the states a residuary and inviolable sovereignty. The federal government may encourage state cooperation through spending conditions and incentives, but may not conscript state officers into federal service. Printz, together with New York v. United States, forms the anti-commandeering doctrine that shapes modern federal-state relations.