Citation 22 Ill.469 U.S. 528, 105 S. Ct. 1005, 83 L. Ed. Decided Feb. 19, 1985. The Appellant, Garcia (Appellant), brought suit against his employer the San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (Appellee), arguing that its function as a transit authority was a “non-traditional” function of state government. Holding/Rule
In other words, each state has elected U.S. senators and representatives who are expected to protect the state’s interests and rights. Joe G. GARCIA, Appellant v. SAN ANTONIO METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY et al.
Procedural History. 82-1951, Donovan, Secretary of Labor v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority et al., also on appeal from the same court. The United States Supreme Court remanded the case, and the district court again ruled for SAMTA. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor in dissent remarked that “the Court today surveys the battle scene of federalism, and sounds a retreat.” Federalism scholar Thomas Anton remarked, “Important and thoughtful as the Garcia ruling may be, we should not imagine that it signifies the end to the debate [over federalism]” (Anton 1989, 16). 82-1913 Argued: March 19, 1984 Decided: February 19, 1985 [ Footnote * ] Together with No. While the Tenth Amendment provides states, or the people, reserved powers not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution or prohibited by it to the states, the courts have shifted in the interpretation of this amendment over time, sometimes moving toward a strict constructionist view and protecting states’ rights and at other times taking an expansive view of federal powers. SEE ALSO: National League of Cities v. Usery; Tenth Amendment, http://encyclopedia.federalism.org/index.php?title=Garcia_v._San_Antonio_Metropolitan_Transit_Authority_(1985)&oldid=2573. Reargued October 1, 1984. In a 5–4 vote in Garcia, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled its decision in National League of Cities v. Usery (1976), which had said that the individual states were not subject to wage and hour protections under the Fair Labor Standards Act as applied “in … Thomas Anton, American Federalism and Public Policy (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989); Mark R. Killenbeck, The Tenth Amendment and State Sovereignty: Constitutional History and Contemporary Issues (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002); John Kincaid, “Constitutional Federalisms Labor’s Role in Displacing Places to Benefit Persons,” P.S. (1985) No. The dissent in Garcia argued that despite the claim of the majority opinion that this ruling secured the concept of federalism, the reality was that the Tenth Amendment was effectively reduced to “meaningless rhetoric” as to issues involving the Commerce Clause.
However, these shifting interpretations are usually incremental and historically disparate. Syllabus. SCOTUS overruled Nat'l League of Cities.
Garcia v. San Antonio MTA SCOTUS- 1985 Facts. Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority.
Case regarding Congressional wage regulation, through the FLSA, of state government-run mass transit. Garcia and the Department of Labor appealed directly to the United States Supreme Court. Argued March 19, 1984. TRANSIT AUTH. GARCIA v. SAN ANTONIO METRO. Synopsis of Rule of Law. It was therefore presumed by the majority that the legislative process will work properly and therefore the courts will give great deference to the actions of Congress when it is a matter of regulating both states and private entities.