Laserfiche WebLink
8Federal and local Interests can be accommodated without preempting local authority to regulate the Installation of amateur radio antennas. The APA <br />said that the TO should continue to leave the Issue of regulating amateur <br />antennas with the local government and with the state and Federal courts. <br />DIscugg fnn <br />20. When considering preemption, we must begin with two <br />constitutional provisions. The tenth amendment provides that any powers <br />which the constitution either does not delegate to the United States or <br />does not prohibit the states from exercising are reserved to the states <br />These are the police powers of the states. The Supremacy Clause, however, <br />provides that the constitution and the laws of the United States shall <br />supersede any state law to the contrary. Article III, Section 2. Given <br />these basic premises, state laws may be preempted In three ways: First, <br />Congress may expressly preempt the state law. See Jones v. Rath ParUnn <br />Cfl., 430 U.S. 519, 525 (1977). Or, Congress may Indlcate Its Intent to <br />complete y occupy a given field so that any state law encompassed within <br />that f eld would ImpIIcIty be preempted. Such Intent to preempt could be <br />found In a congressional regulatory scheme that was so pervasive that <br />ft would be reasonable to assume that Congress did not Intend to permit <br />the states to supplement It. See "Idellty Federal Snvinng a Acet» <br />ALujJfi la CufiStn, 458 U.S. 141, 153 (1982). Finally, preemption may be <br />warranted when state law conflicts with federal law. Such conflicts <br />may occur when "compliance with both Federal and state regulations Is <br />373 U.S. 132, 142, 143 (1963), or when state law "stands as an obstacle <br />to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives <br />of Congress," HJnes Y. DnyIdOtfItZ, 312 U.S. 52, 67 (1941). Furthermore, <br />federal regulations have the same preemptive effect as federal statutes. <br />Fidelity Federal Savings A Loan Assoelatlon v/. la supra. <br />before us requires us to determine the extent <br />to which state and local zoning regulations may conflict with federal <br />policies concerning amateur radio operatorse <br />t <br />22. Few matters coming before us present such a clear dichotomy <br />of viewpoint as does the Instant Issue. The cities, counties, local <br />communities and housing associations see an obligation to all of their <br />citizens and try to address their concerns. This Is accomplished <br />through regulations, ordinances or covenants oriented toward the health, <br />safety and general welfare of those they regulate. At the opposite <br />pole are the Individual amateur operators and their support groups who <br />are troubled by local regulations which may Inhibit the use of amateur <br />stations or. In some Instances, totally preclude amateur communications. <br />Aligned with the operators are such entitles as the Department of Defense, <br />the American Red Cross and local civil defense and emergency organizations <br />who have found In Amateur Radio a pool of skilled radio operators and a