This is an essay I wrote off the top of my head for a test a while back over the doctrine of standing. These essays are not meant to be the authority on the subject, but I have edited them to the best of my knowledge to make them worthy of a read for people looking for a foundation on the topic.
Federalism Issues with Two Supreme Court Cases
In New York v. United States (1992) and Printz v. United States (1997), a very specific direction is taken regarding federalism. The relationship between the national government and individual states has always been strained. It gives and takes. These two Supreme Court cases, however, placed more power in the hands of the states.
The first decision indicates that the national government may us incentives to compel states, even to the point of coercion. The federal government may not, however, compel states through sheer penalization. When government at the federal level can execute the action through its own constitutional powers, it may not compel states.
Furthermore, in Printz v. United States the national government is forbidden from circumvention of states by going directly to state agencies or staff. These state actors are part of the state. The federal government must work with the states to make the desired result occur in regards to state agencies and staff.
These two decisions increased state power and restricted the federal government. It partially reversed a trend in federalism of bigger national government at the expense of the states.