What is the jurisprudence of the US Supreme Court on the power of the city to enact local ordinances
Full Question:
Answer:
The police power of the state to regulate and control the use of its highways
may be delegated to municipalities for exercise by them in the interest of
public safety and the promotion of the general welfare. A municipality to
which the power to regulate the use of its streets has been delegated by
constitutional provision or legislative enactment may adopt regulations
governing the operation of motor vehicles within its limits, provided such
regulations are reasonable, and are not in conflict with the principles of
constitutional law or valid statutes governing the subject. But a city may not
attempt to regulate beyond its jurisdiction.
construed.
The doctrine of preemption, a corollary to the Supremacy Clause of the
Federal Constitution, provides that any municipal law that is inconsistent
with federal law is without effect. Municipal regulations are preempted in one
of three ways: (1) when Congress expressly preempts the regulation; (2)
when Congress implicitly preempts a local regulation by regulating a certain
area in a comprehensive fashion; and (3) when a local regulation conflicts
with federal law, thus frustrating the purpose of the federal legislation.
Municipal corporations are commonly given the power to regulate the use of
their streets and sidewalks, or, more specifically, the vehicles used thereon,
and reasonable regulations in respect to the operation of vehicles, aimed at
preserving the safety, welfare, and convenience of the public, are clearly
valid. A city's power to adopt rules that will avoid anticipated traffic safety
problems is the same as its power to correct those hazards that have been
revealed by actual events. A traffic regulation closing a downtown street to
vehicular traffic during certain time periods for use as pedestrian mall
represents a legitimate use of the city's police power to advance economic,
aesthetic, and safety-related goals