Police Power

(redirected from Regulatory State)
Also found in: Dictionary, Medical, Encyclopedia.

Police Power

The authority conferred upon the states by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and which the states delegate to their political subdivisions to enact measures to preserve and protect the safety, health, Welfare, and morals of the community.

Police power describes the basic right of governments to make laws and regulations for the benefit of their communities. Under the system of government in the United States, only states have the right to make laws based on their police power. The lawmaking power of the federal government is limited to the specific grants of power found in the Constitution.

The right of states to make laws governing safety, health, welfare, and morals is derived from the Tenth Amendment, which states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." State legislatures exercise their police power by enacting statutes, and they also delegate much of their police power to counties, cities, towns, villages, and large boroughs within the state.

Police power does not specifically refer to the right of state and local government to create police forces, although the police power does include that right. Police power is also used as the basis for enacting a variety of substantive laws in such areas as Zoning, land use, fire and Building Codes, gambling, discrimination, parking, crime, licensing of professionals, liquor, motor vehicles, bicycles, nuisances, schooling, and sanitation.

If a law enacted pursuant to the police power does not promote the health, safety, or welfare of the community, it is likely to be an unconstitutional deprivation of life, liberty, or property. The most common challenge to a statute enacted pursuant to the police power is that it constitutes a taking. A taking occurs when the government deprives a person of property or directly interferes with or substantially disturbs a person's use and enjoyment of his or her property.

The case of Mahony v. Township of Hampton, 539 Pa. 193, 651 A.2d 525 (1994) illustrates how a state or local jurisdiction can exceed its police power. Mahony involved a zoning ordinance enacted by the township of Hampton in Pennsylvania. The ordinance prohibited a private party from operating a gas well in a residential district but allowed the operation of such wells by the government. Jack D. Mahony, a landowner who operated a gas well, objected to the ordinance, arguing that the disparate treatment of public and private operation of gas wells was Arbitrary and not justified by any concerns related to the police power. Mahony noted that the State Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) already regulated all gas wells in the state and that there was no factual basis for distinguishing between public and private wells.

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania agreed with Mahony that the regulation by the DER was sufficient to secure the safety of the community. The court opined that if the township wished to further ensure gas well safety, it could require the posting of a bond with the township before granting a license to operate the well. Such a measure would ensure that the gas well was being operated by a financially secure person who would have the resources to keep the well in good repair. The court held that the total ban on private operation of gas wells in residential districts was unreasonable and that it bore no real and substantial relation to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Therefore, the ordinance was an invalid exercise of the police power.

Cross-references

Eminent Domain; Land-Use Control; States' Rights.

West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
These questions (and much much more) are addressed in Paul Tucker's extensive examination of independent authorities, including central banks, in his book, "Unelected Power; the Quest for Legitimacy in Central Banking and the Regulatory State".
In this Review, I focus on the oversight role of this toolbox in constraining the regulatory state. The following table depicts this toolbox.
Is there an escape hatch, a way to refresh the constitutional republic and constrain the expanding regulatory state? In his final chapter, Moreno discusses several avenues that might lead to meaningful reform, but he ultimately leaves the reader without a global positioning system that may guide him or her to a classical liberal's paradise.
During his remarks, Donohue said that a "major pro-growth" initiative that Chamber influenced in 2017 was "reining in the regulatory state after eight long years of regulation run amok" under the Obama administration.
This non-governmental organization has become a focus of expertise and according to Bianculli has also strengthened the regulatory state in Brazil.
But, to the extent that these protective firms are operating within a weak or failed regulatory state and providing security and protection services to people on the ground, they do provide insight into the tendencies of protective firms to concentrate or not.
The judicial flat coupled with an aggressive regulatory state can disarm us.
There is nothing better than a hard look at empirical evidence to see if it supports those who espouse freer markets or those who embrace the regulatory state as models to enhance our prosperity and health.
* Ballooning of the regulatory state: The regulatory state has grown in lockstep with the ballooning of transfer payments and taxes.
The most important growth of the regulatory state took place during the Nixon administration, when general welfare regulations (like occupational safety or clean air) gave regulatory agencies enormous discretion to impose regulations on any business based on criteria determined by the bureaucracy itself.