Yes. Though I would hope they would not do so except under extreme circumstances.
You really need to take civics classes.
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Free to organize themselves locally, the states have created various municipal sub-divisions such as counties, cities, townships, library boards, and special taxing districts. The relationship of these sub-divisions between each other and the state, and the authority each sub-division possesses are subjects of state constitutions and statutes.
A prime example was the governor of NY threatening to remove the mayor of NYC.
The US Constitution and Local Government
Back in the 6Os, liberal Democrat legal scholar Raoul Berger wrote a series of books on the 14th Amendment and one called Government by Judiciary. He basically showed how the SCOTUS butchered the 14th amendment. I got almost all his books.
As promised, I got this from AI when I searched Raoul Berger on the 14th amendment.
"AI Overview
Raoul Berger, a prominent constitutional scholar, argued that the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment should be interpreted narrowly, focusing on the rights of citizens of the United States, and not as a basis for broad federal protection of individual rights.
Here's a more detailed explanation of Berger's perspective:
Narrow Interpretation of the Privileges or Immunities Clause:
Berger believed that the Privileges or Immunities Clause, which states "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States," should be interpreted in a limited way, focusing on the rights of U.S. citizens, not as a general basis for federal protection of individual rights.
Emphasis on Original Intent:
Berger, a proponent of originalism, argued that the clause's meaning should be determined by the original intent of the framers, and that the clause was intended to protect specific rights of national citizenship, not to expand federal power over state actions.
Limited Scope of the Clause:
Berger argued that the Privileges or Immunities Clause, as understood by the framers, did not encompass the rights protected by the Bill of Rights.
Focus on Specific Rights:
Berger believed that the Privileges or Immunities Clause protected a limited set of rights related to the status of being a national citizen, such as the right to travel freely between states, to petition the federal government, and to engage in interstate commerce.
Relevance to the Fourteenth Amendment:
Berger's views on the Privileges or Immunities Clause are central to his broader interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, which he argued was intended to address the specific issue of slavery and racial discrimination in the states.
Counter to Judicial Activism:
Berger's work is often seen as a critique of judicial activism, arguing that the Court should not expand the scope of constitutional rights beyond what the framers intended.
Contrasting Views:
Akhil Amar, another prominent constitutional scholar, argues that the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment wanted to extend the due process right not only to citizens, but to all other persons as well, which required a separate Due Process Clause. "
The author of the Amendment said otherwise. Akhil Amar is a poopy head. 💩
