New York v. United States

Facts

Low level radioactive waste comes from hospitals, research institutions, industry and the Government, and it must be isolated from people for long periods. By 1979 only three disposal sites operated, in Nevada, Washington and South Carolina. When the Washington and Nevada sites shut down temporarily in 1979, South Carolina's governor ordered a 50% cut in the waste accepted at its site. In 1980 Congress declared each State responsible for providing for disposal of waste generated within its borders and authorized regional compacts. In 1985 Congress passed the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985, a compromise between States with disposal sites (sited States) and States without them (unsited States). The sited States agreed to keep accepting waste from other States for seven more years. The unsited States agreed to end their reliance on the sited States by 1992. The Act used three kinds of incentives: monetary incentives, access incentives (denial of access to disposal sites), and a take title provision. Under the take title provision, a State that could not provide for disposal of all its waste by January 1, 1996 would be required, on a generator's request, to take title to the waste, take possession of it, and be liable for the generator's damages. New York did not join a compact. It passed legislation to provide for an in-state disposal facility and identified five potential sites in two counties, whose residents opposed the State's choice.

Issues

1. May Congress, consistent with the constitutional division of authority between the federal and state governments, force a State either to take title to radioactive waste and become liable for damages or to regulate as Congress instructs?
2. May Congress use conditional payments and the denial of access to other States' disposal sites to encourage States to provide for the disposal of their own radioactive waste?
3. Do the Act's monetary and access incentives deny any State a republican form of government under the Guarantee Clause?

Holding

The take title provision exceeds Congress's powers and is inconsistent with the federal structure, because it forces a State to take title to waste or to regulate as Congress instructs, and Congress cannot compel either. The monetary and access incentives are permissible and, even assuming the Guarantee Clause claim is justiciable, do not deny any State a republican form of government, and the take title provision is severable from the rest of the Act.