Reposted by Nathan Solis
Nathan Solis
@tarantulaarms.bsky.social
2.9K followers 874 following 1.1K posts
Hello, Mother Leopard. Editor at The L.A. Local Normal amount of hands and feet. Definitely not a spider. thelalocal.org/author/nathan-solis
Hello, Mother Leopard. Editor at The L.A. Local Normal amount of hands and feet. Definitely not a spider. thelalocal.org/author/nathan-solis
![FAC
FIRST
AMENDMENT
COALITION
Page 2
1999). The issue is therefore whether any other federal law allows or requires the County to withhold the records requested by Mr. Scott.
The Supremacy Clause "makes 'Law of the Land' only 'Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance [of the Constitution]." (Printz v. United States (1997) 521 U.S. 898, 924, emphasis added.) If an otherwise valid federal law is adopted, it can prevail over contrary state law. (See, e.g., Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians v. North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians (2025) 117 Cal.App.5th 91, 112, fn. 6 ["The laws of the United States 'shall be the supreme Law of the Land,' notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Constitution or laws of any state."] [quoting U.S. Const., art. VI, cl. 2].)
For example, if a federal law restricts disclosure of records, it might preempt a state statute to the contrary. (See Rim of the World Unified School Dist. v. Superior Court 2002) 104
Cal.App.4th 1393, 1399 ["Thus, we conclude that FERA preempts section 48918, in that section 48918 requires the public disclosure of student expulsion records while FERPA conditions the receipt of federal funds on protecting students and their parents from disclosure of this very type of record."].)
However, in the absence of a federal law on point, the Supremacy Clause by itself does not create any right or impose any duty to withhold public records. Perhaps a federal agency or official would prefer that the County not disclose the requested records, but the Supremacy Clause demands compliance only with laws of the United States, not mere wishes.
Absent a valid federal law to the contrary, states "retain substantial sovereign authority under our constitutional system," Gregory v. Ashcroft, 501 U.S. 452, 457(1991), including the power to determine the conditions under which public records of state or local agencies must be disclosed.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:vnsn3gjqvtaianuuziyiqxlx/bafkreidgmkc625oeemhul5lr676tmcby3x2oqk2at63onpzpepnmg5r5cy)
