Article 1, Section 1, Clause 3 — Subject Matter Of Compacts

prev | next

Article I, Section 10, Clause 3:

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

As instruments based on the combined powers of Congress and the states, compacts have a broad base of authority that can be leveraged for many governmental endeavors.[1](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn1art1 " See Felix Frankfurter & James M. Landis, The Compact Clause of the Constitution—A Study in Interstate Adjustments, 34 Yale L. J. 685, 688 (1925). The Supreme Court has stated in dicta that compacts may not be used to alter the Constitutional structure of government. See Pennsylvania v. Wheeling & Belmont Bridge Co., 59 U.S. 421, 433 (1855) (stating that Congress cannot not lose its power to regulate interstate commerce through a compact); Wilson v. Mason, 5 U.S. 45, 61, 2 L. Ed. 29 (1801) (declining to adopt a construction of an compact that would “annul the [C]onstitution” by depriving federal courts of constitutionally provided jurisdiction). ") For many years after the Constitution was adopted, boundary disputes were the predominate subject of all compacts and agreements.[2](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn2art1 " See, e.g., Frankfurter & Landis, supra note 1, at 735–48; Richard H. Leach, The Federal Government and Interstate Compacts, 29 Fordham L. Rev. 421, 421–22 (1961). The first compact approved under the Constitution was an agreement between Virginia and the delegates of the then-district of Kentucky to set boundaries between Virginia the newly formed State of Kentucky. See 1 Stat. 189 (1791). See also De Veau v. Braisted, 363 U.S. 144, 154 (1960) (discussing history of congressional approval of state compacts). ") After the turn of the twentieth century, states began to use interstate compacts more often as a tool for solving complex regional problems.[3](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn3art1 " See Leach, supra note 2, at 421–22; Duncan B. Hollis, The Elusive Foreign Compact, 73 Mo. L. Rev. 1071, 1074–75 (2008). See also West Virginia ex rel. Dyer v. Sims, 341 U.S. 22, 27 (1951) ( “The growing interdependence of regional interests, calling for regional adjustments, has brought extensive use of interstate compacts.” ). ") States made compacts to apportion interstate water bodies, particularly rivers in the Western United States,[4](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn4art1 " See, e.g., La Plata River Compact, Pub. L. No. 68-346, 43 Stat. 796 (1925); South Platte River Compact, Pub. L. No. 69-37, 44 Stat. 195 (1926); Colorado River Compact, Pub. L. No. 70-642, § 13, 45 Stat. 1057 (1928); Rio Grande Compact of 1938, Pub. L. No. 76-96, 53 Stat. 785 (1939); Republican River Compact, Pub. L. No. 78-60, 57 Stat. 86 (1943). ") and to manage interstate resources and properties, such as oil and gas,[5](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn5art1 " See, e.g., Interstate Compact to Preserve Oil and Gas, Pub. Res. No. 74-64, 49 Stat. 939 (1935). ") fisheries,[6](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn6art1 " See, e.g., Columbia River Compact, Pub. L. No. 65-123, 40 Stat. 515 (1918); Pacific Marine Fisheries Compact, Pub. L. No. 80-232, 61 Stat. 419 (1947). ") and parks.[7](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn7art1 " See, e.g., Palisades Interstate Park Compact, Pub. Res. No. 75-65, 50 Stat. 719 (1937); Breaks Interstate Park Compact, Pub. L. No. 83-543, 68 Stat. 571 (1954). ") States also began to use compacts for major public undertakings and infrastructure projects, such as the Port of New York and New Jersey.[8](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn8art1 " See Joint Resolution Granting Consent of Congress to an Agreement or Compact for the Creation of the Port of New York District and the Establishment of the Port of New York Authority, Pub. Res. No. 67-17, 42 Stat. 174 (1921). ")

During this time, Congress began to pass legislation that provided advance consent to whole classes of compacts on some subjects. In one notable example, Congress passed legislation consenting to any interstate compact for the prevention of crime.[9](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn9art1 " See An Act Granting Consent of Congress to Any Two or More States to Enter into Agreements or Compacts for Cooperative Effort and Mutual Assistance in the Prevention of Crime, Pub. L. No. 73-292, 48 Stat. 909 (1934) (codified at 4 U.S.C. § 112). ") This law led to several widely adopted compacts addressing probationers’ and parolees’ travel between states and other law enforcement matters.[10](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn10art1 " See, e.g., Interstate Compact for Juveniles, codified in Va. Code Ann. § 16.1-323; Interstate Corrections Compact, codified in Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 196.610; Agreement on Detainers, codified in Ala. Code § 15-9-81; New England Corrections Compact, codified in Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 18–102; New England Police Compact, codified in 42 R.I. Gen. Laws Ann. § 42-37-1; Western Corrections Compact, codified in Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-3-401. ")

Interstate compact usage eventually evolved to address an even wider range of issues. Congress authorized compacts addressing subjects as varied as education,[11](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn11art1 " See, e.g., Western Regional Education Compact, Pub. L. No. 83–226, 67 Stat. 490 (1953); New Hampshire-Vermont Interstate School Compact, Pub. L. No. 91-21, 83 Stat. 14 (1969). ") urban planning,[12](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn12art1 " See, e.g., Delaware Valley Urban Area Compact, codified in N.J. Stat. Ann. §§ 32:27-1–32:27-27 (advance congressional consent provided by the Housing Act of 1961, Pub. L. No. 87-70, § 310, 75 Stat. 170 (1961) (previously codified in 40 U.S.C. § 461, repealed by Pub. L. No. 97-35, § 313, 95 Stat. 398 (1981))). ") tourism and historic preservation,[13](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn13art1 " See, e.g., Historic Chattahoochee Compact, Pub. L. No. 95-462, 92 Stat 1271 (1978); Cumbres and Toltec Scenic Railroad Compact, Pub. L. No. 93-467, 88 Stat. 1421 (1974). ") tax,[14](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn14art1 " See Compact on Taxation of Motor Fuels Consumed by Interstate Buses, Pub. L. No. 89-11, 79 Stat. 58 (1965). ") emergency aid,[15](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn15art1 " See Interstate Compact for Mutual Military Aid in an Emergency, Pub. L. No. 82-434, 66 Stat. 315 (1952) (amended by Pub. L. No. 84-564, 70 Stat. 247 (1956); Emergency Management Assistance Compact; Pub. L. No.

, 110 Stat. 3877 (1996). ")

104-321

, 110 Stat. 3877 (1996). fire prevention,[16](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn16art1 " See, e.g., South Central Forest Fire Protection Compact, Pub. L. No. 83-642, 68 Stat. 783 (1954); Middle Atlantic Interstate Forest Fire Protection Compact, Pub. L. No. 84-790, 70 Stat. 636 (1956); Northwest Fire Protection Agreement, Pub. L. No.

, 112 Stat. 33391 (1998). ") transportation,[17](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn17art1 " See, e.g., Joint Resolution Granting the Consent of Congress to the Several States to Negotiate and Enter into Compacts for the Purpose of Promoting Highway Safety, Pub. L. No. 85-684, 72 Stat. 635 (1957). ") sewage disposal,[18](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-1/clause-3/subject-matter-of-compacts#fn18art1 " See<