Interstate compact: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Bbctol
imported>JMMaok
expanded introduction and removed "introduction too short" box
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|Formal agreement between two or more U.S. states}}
{{short description|Formal agreement between two or more U.S. states}}
In the [[United States]], an '''interstate compact''' is a pact or agreement between two or more [[U.S. state|states]], or between states and any foreign sub-national government.  
 
In the [[United States]], an '''interstate compact''' is a pact or agreement between two or more [[U.S. state|states]], or between states and any foreign sub-national government. Common reasons for creating interstate compacts include resolution of boundary disputes, cooperative management of infrastructure, and reduction of administrative barriers. Interstate compacts are subject to regulation by Congress. The history of interstate compacts ranges from treaties that predate the Constitution to the present day.


== Description ==
== Description ==
Line 16: Line 17:


== Legal background ==
== Legal background ==
The Compact Clause ([[Article One of the United States Constitution#Clause 3: Compact Clause|Article I, Section 10, Clause 3]]) of the [[United States Constitution]] provides that "No State shall, without the Consent of [[United States Congress|Congress]],... enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power,..."<ref name="YLJ319">{{cite journal| title=The Power of the States to Make Compacts| journal=The Yale Law Journal| volume=31| issue=6| date=April 1922| pages=635–639| publisher= The Yale Law Journal Company| doi=10.2307/788529| jstor=788529}}</ref>
The Compact Clause ([[Article One of the United States Constitution#Clause 3: Compact Clause|Article I, Section 10, Clause 3]]) of the [[United States Constitution]] provides that "No State shall, without the Consent of [[United States Congress|Congress]],... enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power,... unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."<ref name="YLJ319">{{cite journal| title=The Power of the States to Make Compacts| journal=The Yale Law Journal| volume=31| issue=6| date=April 1922| pages=635–639| publisher= The Yale Law Journal Company| doi=10.2307/788529| jstor=788529}}</ref>
 
In 2025, the states of [[California]],<ref name="Governor Gavin Newsom">{{cite web | title=Western States Scientific Safety Review Workgroup Confirms the Pfizer Vaccine is Safe and Efficacious for Public Use | date=13 December 2020 | url=https://www.gov.ca.gov/2020/12/13/western-states-scientific-safety-review-workgroup-confirms-the-pfizer-vaccine-is-safe-and-efficacious-for-public-use/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery }}</ref> [[Washington (state)|Washington]],<ref name="Governor Bob Ferguson">{{cite web | title=Washington, California and Oregon to launch new West Coast Health Alliance to uphold scientific integrity in public health as Trump destroys CDC's credibility &#124; Governor Bob Ferguson | url=https://governor.wa.gov/news/2025/washington-california-and-oregon-launch-new-west-coast-health-alliance-uphold-scientific-integrity }}</ref>  and [[Oregon]]<ref name="Governor Tina Kotek">{{cite web | title=Post - Newsroom | url=https://apps.oregon.gov/oregon-newsroom/OR/GOV/Posts/Post/oregon-washington-and-california-form-western-health-alliance }}</ref> entered into a compact, forming the [[West Coast Health Alliance]], in response to an emergent degradation of the "[[Second Trump administration|U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention]]'s (CDC) credibility and scientific integrity."


However, in a report released in October 2019 about the proposed [[National Popular Vote Interstate Compact]], the [[Congressional Research Service]] (CRS) cited the [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]]'s ruling in ''[[Virginia v. Tennessee]]'' (1893)—reaffirmed in ''[[U.S. Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Comm'n|U.S. Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Commission]]'' (1978) and ''[[Cuyler v. Adams]]'' (1981)—that ruled that explicit congressional consent of interstate compacts is not required for agreements "which the United States can have no possible objection or have any interest in interfering with" (in addition to ruling that the words "agreement" and "compact" used in the Compact Clause are synonyms).{{sfn|Neale|Nolan|2019|pp=22–23}} Instead, the Court required explicit congressional consent for interstate compacts that are "directed to the formation of any combination tending to the increase of political power in the States, which may encroach upon or interfere with the just supremacy of the United States"—meaning where the [[Balance of power (federalism)|vertical balance of power]] between the federal government and state governments is altered in favor of state governments,{{sfn|Neale|Nolan|2019|p=24}} while the report references ''U.S. Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Commission'' as stating that the "pertinent inquiry [with respect to the Compact Clause] is one of potential, rather than actual, impact on federal supremacy" in noting that the potential erosion of an [[Enumerated powers (United States)|enumerated power]] of the [[United States Congress]] by an interstate compact can arguably require explicit congressional approval.{{sfn|Neale|Nolan|2019|p=24}}<ref name="U.S. Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Commission">{{cite web|title=United States Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Comm'n, 434 U.S. 452 (1978)|website=[[Justia]]|url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/434/452/|access-date=December 23, 2022}} {{PD-notice}}</ref> The CRS report cites the Supreme Court's rulings in ''[[Florida v. Georgia (1855)|Florida v. Georgia]]'' (1855) and in ''[[Texas v. New Mexico and Colorado]]'' (2018) as recognizing that explicit congressional consent is also required for interstate compacts that alter the horizontal balance of power amongst state governments.{{sfn|Neale|Nolan|2019|pp=24–25}}
However, in a report released in October 2019 about the proposed [[National Popular Vote Interstate Compact]], the [[Congressional Research Service]] (CRS) cited the [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]]'s ruling in ''[[Virginia v. Tennessee]]'' (1893)—reaffirmed in ''[[U.S. Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Comm'n|U.S. Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Commission]]'' (1978) and ''[[Cuyler v. Adams]]'' (1981)—that ruled that explicit congressional consent of interstate compacts is not required for agreements "which the United States can have no possible objection or have any interest in interfering with" (in addition to ruling that the words "agreement" and "compact" used in the Compact Clause are synonyms).{{sfn|Neale|Nolan|2019|pp=22–23}} Instead, the Court required explicit congressional consent for interstate compacts that are "directed to the formation of any combination tending to the increase of political power in the States, which may encroach upon or interfere with the just supremacy of the United States"—meaning where the [[Balance of power (federalism)|vertical balance of power]] between the federal government and state governments is altered in favor of state governments,{{sfn|Neale|Nolan|2019|p=24}} while the report references ''U.S. Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Commission'' as stating that the "pertinent inquiry [with respect to the Compact Clause] is one of potential, rather than actual, impact on federal supremacy" in noting that the potential erosion of an [[Enumerated powers (United States)|enumerated power]] of the [[United States Congress]] by an interstate compact can arguably require explicit congressional approval.{{sfn|Neale|Nolan|2019|p=24}}<ref name="U.S. Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Commission">{{cite web|title=United States Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Comm'n, 434 U.S. 452 (1978)|website=[[Justia]]|url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/434/452/|access-date=December 23, 2022}} {{PD-notice}}</ref> The CRS report cites the Supreme Court's rulings in ''[[Florida v. Georgia (1855)|Florida v. Georgia]]'' (1855) and in ''[[Texas v. New Mexico and Colorado]]'' (2018) as recognizing that explicit congressional consent is also required for interstate compacts that alter the horizontal balance of power amongst state governments.{{sfn|Neale|Nolan|2019|pp=24–25}}
Line 28: Line 31:


Prior to 1922, most interstate compacts were either border agreements between states or advisory compacts, the latter of which are tasked with conducting joint studies to report back to the respective state legislatures. With the creation of the [[Port Authority of New York and New Jersey]] in 1922, administrative compacts began to develop as a third, more-empowered type of interstate compact, in which persistent governance structures are tasked by member states with conducting designated services.
Prior to 1922, most interstate compacts were either border agreements between states or advisory compacts, the latter of which are tasked with conducting joint studies to report back to the respective state legislatures. With the creation of the [[Port Authority of New York and New Jersey]] in 1922, administrative compacts began to develop as a third, more-empowered type of interstate compact, in which persistent governance structures are tasked by member states with conducting designated services.
Focusing precisely on the 1920s when there was considerable enthusiasm for interstate compacting--and drawing parallels between the legal and political culture of the 1920s and today--scholars [[Jon D. Michaels]] and Emme Tyler invite today's governors and state legislators to rediscover and re-deploy interstate compacts and agreements, this time to meet the challenges of modern public administration.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Michaels |first1=Jon D. |last2=Tyler |first2=Emme M. |title=Just-Right Government: Interstate Compacts and Multistate Governance in an Era of Political Polarization, Policy Paralysis, and Bad-Faith Partisanship |journal=Indiana Law Journal |date=2023 |volume=98 |issue=3 |page=863}}</ref> Michaels and [[Aziz Huq]], reacting to the Trump administration's abdication of federal regulatory and social-service responsibilities, have similarly encouraged more aggressive experimentation with compacts and agreements, urging groups of like-minded states to "set up interstate academic programs that pool students and faculty cut off from federal funds into large regional research consortia; re-create public-health and meteorology forecasting centers servicing member states; and finance pandemic planning and countermeasures, precisely what was lacking--and sorely needed--early in the COVID-19 crisis."<ref>{{cite news |last1=Huq |first1=Aziz Z. |last2=Michaels |first2=Jon |title=As the Feds Abdicate Responsibilities, States Should Band Together |url=https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2025-06-09/state-coalitions-federal |access-date=11 August 2025 |work=Los Angeles Times |date=9 June 2025}}</ref>


Today, Virginia is a member of the most interstate compacts at 40, while Hawaii is a member of the fewest at 15.<ref>{{cite web| title=Interstate Compacts: Background, History and Modern Use| url=http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/kc/system/files/Compacts%20Background.pdf| website=csg.org| publisher=National Center for Interstate Compacts| location=Lexington, Kentucky| access-date= |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210904070613/http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/kc/system/files/Compacts%20Background.pdf |archive-date=September 4, 2021 |url-status=dead}}</ref>
Today, Virginia is a member of the most interstate compacts at 40, while Hawaii is a member of the fewest at 15.<ref>{{cite web| title=Interstate Compacts: Background, History and Modern Use| url=http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/kc/system/files/Compacts%20Background.pdf| website=csg.org| publisher=National Center for Interstate Compacts| location=Lexington, Kentucky| access-date= |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210904070613/http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/kc/system/files/Compacts%20Background.pdf |archive-date=September 4, 2021 |url-status=dead}}</ref>
Line 74: Line 79:
===Health and emergency===
===Health and emergency===


*[[Nurse Licensure Compact]] (33 states)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Nurse Licensure Compact (NLC) |url=https://www.ncsbn.org/nurse-licensure-compact.htm}}</ref>
*[[Nurse Licensure Compact]] (43 states)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Nurse Licensure Compact |url=https://www.nursecompact.com/ |access-date=20 October 2025}}</ref>
*[[Compact on Mental Health]] (45 states)
*[[Recognition of EMS Personnel Licensure Interstate CompAct]] (REPLICA, or EMS Compact; 20 states)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Compact History {{!}} EMS Compact |url=https://www.emscompact.gov/the-compact/compact-history |access-date=2024-05-31 |website=www.emscompact.gov}}</ref>
*[[Recognition of EMS Personnel Licensure Interstate CompAct]] (REPLICA, or EMS Compact; 20 states)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Compact History {{!}} EMS Compact |url=https://www.emscompact.gov/the-compact/compact-history |access-date=2024-05-31 |website=www.emscompact.gov}}</ref>
*[[Western States Pact]] ([[California]], [[Colorado]], [[Nevada]], [[Oregon]], [[Washington (state)|Washington]]) <ref>{{cite web |last1=Klar |first1=Rebecca |date=April 27, 2020 |title=Colorado and Nevada join western states cooperating on reopening |url=https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/494890-colorado-and-nevada-join-western-states-cooperating-on-reopening-after |access-date=July 26, 2020 |work=The Hill}}</ref>
*[[Western States Pact]] ([[California]], [[Colorado]], [[Nevada]], [[Oregon]], [[Washington (state)|Washington]])<ref>{{cite web |last1=Klar |first1=Rebecca |date=April 27, 2020 |title=Colorado and Nevada join western states cooperating on reopening |url=https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/494890-colorado-and-nevada-join-western-states-cooperating-on-reopening-after |access-date=July 26, 2020 |work=The Hill}}</ref>
*[[Eastern States Multi-state Council]] ([[New York (state)|New York]], [[New Jersey]], [[Pennsylvania]], [[Massachusetts]], [[Rhode Island]], [[Connecticut]], [[Delaware]])<ref>{{cite web |last1=Lahut |first1=Jake |date=Apr 13, 2020 |title=New York Gov. Cuomo unveils multistate coalition to reopen economy after coronavirus |url=https://www.businessinsider.com/cuomo-launches-multi-state-coalition-to-re-open-economy-post-corona-2020-4?op=1 |access-date=July 26, 2020 |website=Business Insider}}</ref>
*[[Eastern States Multi-state Council]] ([[New York (state)|New York]], [[New Jersey]], [[Pennsylvania]], [[Massachusetts]], [[Rhode Island]], [[Connecticut]], [[Delaware]])<ref>{{cite web |last1=Lahut |first1=Jake |date=Apr 13, 2020 |title=New York Gov. Cuomo unveils multistate coalition to reopen economy after coronavirus |url=https://www.businessinsider.com/cuomo-launches-multi-state-coalition-to-re-open-economy-post-corona-2020-4?op=1 |access-date=July 26, 2020 |website=Business Insider}}</ref>
*[[Midwest Governors Regional Pact]] ([[Illinois]], [[Indiana]], [[Kentucky]], [[Michigan]], [[Minnesota]], [[Ohio]], [[Wisconsin]])
*[[Midwest Governors Regional Pact]] ([[Illinois]], [[Indiana]], [[Kentucky]], [[Michigan]], [[Minnesota]], [[Ohio]], [[Wisconsin]])
Line 82: Line 88:
*[[Health Care Compact]]
*[[Health Care Compact]]
*[[Interstate Civil Defense and Disaster Compact]]
*[[Interstate Civil Defense and Disaster Compact]]
*[[Social Work Licensure Compact]] ([[Alabama]], [[Connecticut]], [[Georgia (U.S. state)|Georgia]], [[Iowa]], [[Kansas]], [[Kentucky]], [[Maine]], [[Missouri]], [[Nebraska]], [[Ohio]], [[South Dakota]], [[Utah]], [[Vermont]], [[Virginia]], [[Washington (state)|Washington]])<ref>{{cite web | url=https://stateline.org/2024/05/28/amid-mental-health-crisis-new-compact-allows-social-workers-to-practice-across-state-lines | title=Amid mental health crisis, new compact allows social workers to practice across state lines Stateline | date=28 May 2024 }}</ref>
*[[Social Work Licensure Compact]] ([[Alabama]], [[Connecticut]], [[Georgia (U.S. state)|Georgia]], [[Iowa]], [[Kansas]], [[Kentucky]], [[Maine]], [[Missouri]], [[Nebraska]], [[Ohio]], [[South Dakota]], [[Utah]], [[Vermont]], [[Virginia]], [[Washington (state)|Washington]])<ref>{{cite web | url=https://stateline.org/2024/05/28/amid-mental-health-crisis-new-compact-allows-social-workers-to-practice-across-state-lines | title=Amid mental health crisis, new compact allows social workers to practice across state lines | website=Stateline | date=28 May 2024 | last=Chatlani | first=Shalina }}</ref>
*[[West Coast Health Alliance]] ([[California]], [[Oregon]], [[Washington (state)|Washington]], [[Hawaii]])<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/03/health/west-coast-states-health-guidance | title=States band together to issue public health guidance after 'destruction' of the CDC  | website=CNN | date=3 September 2025 | last=Goodman | first=Brenda }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.kptv.com/2025/09/04/hawaii-joins-west-coast-health-alliance-breaking-away-cdc/ | title=Hawaii joins West Coast Health Alliance breaking away from CDC | website=KPTV | date=4 September 2025 }}</ref>
*Advanced Practice Registered Nurse Compact (Delaware, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Home |url=https://www.aprncompact.com/ |access-date=2024-05-31 |website=APRNCOMPACT |language=en}}</ref>
*Advanced Practice Registered Nurse Compact (Delaware, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Home |url=https://www.aprncompact.com/ |access-date=2024-05-31 |website=APRNCOMPACT |language=en}}</ref>
*Northeastern Forest Fire Protection Compact (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont)<ref>{{Cite web |last=NFFPC |title=About NECC |url=https://www.nffpc.org/en/necc/about |access-date=2024-05-31 |website=NFFPC |language=en}}</ref>
*Northeastern Forest Fire Protection Compact (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont)<ref>{{Cite web |last=NFFPC |title=About NECC |url=https://www.nffpc.org/en/necc/about |access-date=2024-05-31 |website=NFFPC |language=en}}</ref>
*Physical Therapy Compact (PT License; 30 states)<ref>{{Cite web |title=PT Compact States Map |url=https://ptcompact.org/ptc-states |access-date=2024-05-31 |website=ptcompact.org}}</ref>
*Physical Therapy Compact (PT License; 30 states)<ref>{{Cite web |title=PT Compact States Map |url=https://ptcompact.org/ptc-states |access-date=2024-05-31 |website=ptcompact.org}}</ref>
*Psychological Interjurisdictional Compact (PSYPACT; 40 states, including [[Northern Mariana Islands]] and D.C.)<ref>{{Cite web |title=About Us - Psychology Interjurisdictional Compact (PSYPACT) |url=https://psypact.org/page/About |access-date=2024-05-31 |website=psypact.org}}</ref>
*Psychological Interjurisdictional Compact (PSYPACT; 40 states, including [[Northern Mariana Islands]] and D.C.)<ref>{{Cite web |title=About Us - Psychology Interjurisdictional Compact (PSYPACT) |url=https://psypact.org/page/About |access-date=2024-05-31 |website=psypact.org |archive-date=2024-05-31 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240531044436/https://psypact.org/page/About |url-status=dead }}</ref>
*Interstate Medical Licensure Compact (IMLC; 32 states and Guam)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Compact State Map |url=https://www.imlcc.org/participating-states/ |access-date=2024-05-31 |website=Interstate Medical Licensure Compact |language=en-US}}</ref>
*Interstate Medical Licensure Compact (IMLC; 32 states and Guam)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Compact State Map |url=https://www.imlcc.org/participating-states/ |access-date=2024-05-31 |website=Interstate Medical Licensure Compact |language=en-US}}</ref>
*Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology Compact (ALSPCompact; 32 states)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Compact Map – ASLPCompact |url=https://aslpcompact.com/compact-map/ |access-date=2024-05-31 |language=en-US}}</ref>
*Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology Compact (ALSPCompact; 32 states)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Compact Map – ASLPCompact |url=https://aslpcompact.com/compact-map/ |access-date=2024-05-31 |language=en-US}}</ref>
Line 127: Line 134:
===Other===
===Other===
*[[Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children]] (all 50 states)
*[[Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children]] (all 50 states)
*Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children (all states, and the [[United States Department of Defense]] in an ex-officio, non-voting role)<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Military Interstate Compact |url=https://www.dodea.edu/education/partnership-and-resources/military-interstate-compact |archive-url=http://web.archive.org/web/20241206170248/https://www.dodea.edu/education/partnership-and-resources/military-interstate-compact |archive-date=2024-12-06 |access-date=2025-01-29 |website=DoDEA |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Background - MIC3 |url=https://mic3.net/background/ |access-date=2025-01-29 |website=mic3.net/ |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-07-12 |title=Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children – National Center for Interstate Compacts {{!}} The Council of State Governments |url=https://compacts.csg.org/compact/interstate-compact-on-educational-opportunity-for-military-children/ |access-date=2025-01-29 |language=en-US}}</ref>
*Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children (all states, and the [[United States Department of Defense]] in an ex-officio, non-voting role)<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Military Interstate Compact |url=https://www.dodea.edu/education/partnership-and-resources/military-interstate-compact |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241206170248/https://www.dodea.edu/education/partnership-and-resources/military-interstate-compact |archive-date=2024-12-06 |access-date=2025-01-29 |website=DoDEA |language=en |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Background - MIC3 |url=https://mic3.net/background/ |access-date=2025-01-29 |website=mic3.net/ |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-07-12 |title=Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children – National Center for Interstate Compacts {{!}} The Council of State Governments |url=https://compacts.csg.org/compact/interstate-compact-on-educational-opportunity-for-military-children/ |access-date=2025-01-29 |language=en-US}}</ref>
*[[Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision]] (all states, two territories, and Washington, D.C.)<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.interstatecompact.org|title=ICAOS – Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision|first=ICAOS -|last=Website}}</ref>  
*[[Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision]] (all states, two territories, and Washington, D.C.)<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.interstatecompact.org|title=ICAOS – Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision|first=ICAOS -|last=Website}}</ref>  
*[[Driver License Compact]] (all states except [[Georgia (U.S. state)|Georgia]], [[Massachusetts]], [[Tennessee]], and [[Wisconsin]])
*[[Driver License Compact]] (all states except [[Georgia (U.S. state)|Georgia]], [[Massachusetts]], [[Tennessee]], and [[Wisconsin]])

Latest revision as of 16:50, 29 November 2025

Template:Short description

In the United States, an interstate compact is a pact or agreement between two or more states, or between states and any foreign sub-national government. Common reasons for creating interstate compacts include resolution of boundary disputes, cooperative management of infrastructure, and reduction of administrative barriers. Interstate compacts are subject to regulation by Congress. The history of interstate compacts ranges from treaties that predate the Constitution to the present day.

Description

Most early interstate compacts resolved boundary disputes, but since the early 20th century, compacts have increasingly been used as a tool of state cooperation and mutual recognition on infrastructure, services and professional licensing, often to ease administrative barriers and reduce costs and litigation.[1] In some cases, an agreement will create a new multi-state governmental agency which is responsible for administering or improving some shared resource such as a seaport or public transportation infrastructure. Compacts may also be limited to a certain multi-state region, may be open to all states and insular areas, or may be open to subnational governments in other countries.

Interstate compacts are distinct from, but may involve aspects of, the following:

  • Model acts, which are proposed statutes produced by non-governmental bodies of legal experts to be passed by state legislatures independently, rather than constituting an agreement among multiple states;
  • executive agreements between governors or statewide executive officers of states, which may or may not have the backing of statute or state constitutional law;
  • State-level trigger laws which provide for an automatic action if another one or more states, or the federal government, perform a specified action; or
  • State-level laws mandating, permitting or prohibiting state cooperation with another state government or the federal government regarding certain actions.

Interstate agencies

Several interstate compacts may establish multi-state agencies in order to coordinate policy between, or perform tasks on behalf of, member states. Such agencies may take the form of commissions, with at least one representative from a member state with a voting role in the commission. Alternatively, member states to a compact may opt for cooperation with a single independent non-profit organization which carries out designated tasks without government funding. Actions or rules changes taken by commissions or non-profits may require ratification by the member states to take effect, depending often on whether such actions may alter the terms of the compact.

Legal background

The Compact Clause (Article I, Section 10, Clause 3) of the United States Constitution provides that "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress,... enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power,... unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."[2]

In 2025, the states of California,[3] Washington,[4] and Oregon[5] entered into a compact, forming the West Coast Health Alliance, in response to an emergent degradation of the "U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) credibility and scientific integrity."

However, in a report released in October 2019 about the proposed National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) cited the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Virginia v. Tennessee (1893)—reaffirmed in U.S. Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Commission (1978) and Cuyler v. Adams (1981)—that ruled that explicit congressional consent of interstate compacts is not required for agreements "which the United States can have no possible objection or have any interest in interfering with" (in addition to ruling that the words "agreement" and "compact" used in the Compact Clause are synonyms).Template:Sfn Instead, the Court required explicit congressional consent for interstate compacts that are "directed to the formation of any combination tending to the increase of political power in the States, which may encroach upon or interfere with the just supremacy of the United States"—meaning where the vertical balance of power between the federal government and state governments is altered in favor of state governments,Template:Sfn while the report references U.S. Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Commission as stating that the "pertinent inquiry [with respect to the Compact Clause] is one of potential, rather than actual, impact on federal supremacy" in noting that the potential erosion of an enumerated power of the United States Congress by an interstate compact can arguably require explicit congressional approval.Template:Sfn[6] The CRS report cites the Supreme Court's rulings in Florida v. Georgia (1855) and in Texas v. New Mexico and Colorado (2018) as recognizing that explicit congressional consent is also required for interstate compacts that alter the horizontal balance of power amongst state governments.Template:Sfn

Citing Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority v. Citizens for Abatement of Aircraft Noise, Inc. (1991) as stating that if an enumerated power under the Constitution is legislative, then "Congress must exercise it in conformity with the bicameralism and presentment requirements of Article I, Section VII", and noting that the Republican River Compact was initially vetoed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1942, the CRS report states that if an interstate compact requires explicit congressional approval, it must be approved by both houses of Congress and signed into law by the President in order to become law.Template:Sfn In Cuyler v. Adams, the Court held that congressional approval of interstate compacts makes them federal laws.[7][8] The CRS report cites the Court's opinions in Virginia v. Tennessee and Northeast Bancorp v. Federal Reserve Board of Governors (1985) as stating that any agreement between two or more states that "cover[s] all stipulations affecting the conduct or claims of the parties", prohibits members from "modify[ing] or repeal[ing] [the agreement] unilaterally", and requires "'reciprocation' of mutual obligations" constitutes an interstate compact.Template:Sfn Additionally, the CRS report cites the Court's opinion in Northeast Bancorp as suggesting that a requirement of a new interstate governmental entity is a sufficient condition for an agreement to qualify as being an interstate compact under the Compact Clause.Template:Sfn The CRS report stated that there were approximately 200 interstate compacts in effect in 2019.Template:Sfn

The timing for Congressional consent is not specified by the Constitution, so consent may be given either before or after the states have agreed to a particular compact. The consent may be explicit, but it may also be inferred from circumstances. Congress may also impose conditions as part of its approval of a compact.[1] Congress must explicitly approve any compact that would give a state power that is otherwise designated to the federal government.[9]

History

Treaties between the states, ratified under the Articles of Confederation during the period after American independence in 1776 until the current U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1789, are grandfathered and treated as interstate compacts. This includes agreements like the Treaty of Beaufort, which set the boundary between Georgia and South Carolina in 1787, and is still in effect.

Prior to 1922, most interstate compacts were either border agreements between states or advisory compacts, the latter of which are tasked with conducting joint studies to report back to the respective state legislatures. With the creation of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey in 1922, administrative compacts began to develop as a third, more-empowered type of interstate compact, in which persistent governance structures are tasked by member states with conducting designated services.

Focusing precisely on the 1920s when there was considerable enthusiasm for interstate compacting--and drawing parallels between the legal and political culture of the 1920s and today--scholars Jon D. Michaels and Emme Tyler invite today's governors and state legislators to rediscover and re-deploy interstate compacts and agreements, this time to meet the challenges of modern public administration.[10] Michaels and Aziz Huq, reacting to the Trump administration's abdication of federal regulatory and social-service responsibilities, have similarly encouraged more aggressive experimentation with compacts and agreements, urging groups of like-minded states to "set up interstate academic programs that pool students and faculty cut off from federal funds into large regional research consortia; re-create public-health and meteorology forecasting centers servicing member states; and finance pandemic planning and countermeasures, precisely what was lacking--and sorely needed--early in the COVID-19 crisis."[11]

Today, Virginia is a member of the most interstate compacts at 40, while Hawaii is a member of the fewest at 15.[12]

List of operating agencies created by interstate compact

Borders and land/water administration

Transportation

Health and emergency

Economic development

  • Appalachian Region Interstate Compact (Virginia, West Virginia)
  • Pacific Northwest Economic Region (States of Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, with the Canadian jurisdictions of Alberta, Saskatchewan, British Columbia, Northwest Territories)
  • Interstate Compact on Licensure of Participants in Horse Racing with Pari-Mutuel Wagering (15 states)
  • Southern Growth Policies Compact (12 states)

Education

Energy

Other

Non-operating interstate compacts

With at least one state

  • National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which will not take effect until additional states join the compact to send all their electors to the electoral college based on the results of the popular vote. Currently joined by 17 states and the District of Columbia, amounting to 209 (out of a minimum 270) Electoral College votes, as of 2025.

No longer active

Proposed

See also

Template:Sister project

References

<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

  1. a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  2. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  3. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  4. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  5. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  6. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
    1. REDIRECT Template:Source-attribution
    Template:Redirect template
  7. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
    1. REDIRECT Template:Source-attribution
    Template:Redirect template
  8. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  9. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  10. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  11. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  12. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  13. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  14. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  15. Upper Colorado River Basin Compact of 1948, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 1948
  16. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  17. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  18. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  19. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  20. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  21. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  22. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  23. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  24. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  25. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  26. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  27. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  28. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  29. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  30. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  31. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  32. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  33. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  34. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  35. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  36. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  37. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  38. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  39. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  40. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  41. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  42. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  43. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  44. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  45. a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  46. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  47. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  48. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  49. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  50. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  51. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  52. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".

Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".

Works cited

  • Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".

External links

Script error: No such module "Navbox".