A Response to David Adenekan on the Punch Editorial Board Goofed on the Verdict of the Supreme Court on Local Government Autonomy.

By Azeem Salako.

My attention was drawn to your response to the Punch editorial on the Supreme Court judgement on local government autonomy.

I am therefore compelled to write this rejoinder to your article, which I found to be more misleading than the inadequacy of the Punch’s editorial intervention, which it aimed to correct. I have myself written a review of the same editorial, and you may want to check the below link, which has some of my arguments. https://obalufonics.com/judicial-usurpation-prebendalism-and-fascism-dangers-to-nigerian-democracy/

The Punch editorial is correct that the United States of America operates a two-tiered federalism. The central government and states. This is established in Article IV of the US Constitution.

Contrary to your opinion, there is no place in the US Constitution where the local government is mentioned, whether as a third layer of government or for administrative purposes, and this defines the structure of the US federal system.

The Punch editorial is also correct that the state government in the US oversees the affairs of the local government. This is to the extent that the creation of local administration, subject to the Tenth Amendment, emanates from state constitutions. And to this effect, different states have dissimilar types, forms, processes, structures, and statuses of local government in the US.

For example, in Illinois and New York you cited, the local administration, as granted under the state constitutions, exercises the power to access and manage resources. This doctrine is called the Cooley doctrine, which, for example, allows the counties in New York and Illinois to collect liquor and property taxes, which is not the case in Alabama or Kentucky, and which requires that counties get state approval (weak home rule) to exercise any financial operations.

The case of Chicago you cited is in the same category as California and Colorado, where the practice of local administration is premised on a strong home rule that provides significant autonomy and power for the counties and municipalities. This is almost the opposite in Virginia or Michigan, where counties exercise functions that only the state legislature grants them—Dillion’s Rule.

The argument, therefore, is that whether a particular local government in the US has autonomy, quasi-autonomy, lacks autonomy, etc. is determined by the constitution of the states. This then makes it clear that the local governments in the USA do not have any powers except those granted by the constitutions of their respective states. And this power is also limited in many respects.

Where I considered the Punch editorial to have goofed on this subject matter, in which I have made a review and clarification, is the opinion that all federalism has two tiers. And I listed examples of federal states, not only three-tiered in the case of Germany, India, etc., but also four-tiered in the case of Russia. And where the Supreme Court judgement erred, as I maintained, is overreaching its boundary with an unpopular interpretation of the constitution.

I hope that this intervention enriches the conversation and accordingly enlightens Mr. Adenekan so that he understands that the constitutionality of federalism in the USA operates on two levels.

Azeem Salako is a political researcher on African politics and integration.