This has been very remarkable in countries like Germany and Italy which are in overall, committed to the concept that the place of international legislation agreements in domestic legislation is similar to those in statutes and that should a dispute arise between them, the one which was employed the last will prevail . This acts as a big constitutional change in the UK where the concept of parliamentary supremacy has acted as big hindrance. Unfortunately in modern day, the House of Lords will establish a national parliamentary legislation despite the fact that it came to pass later than, and instead enact the EU legislation .
It is accepted the fact that the EU legislations is more supreme than the treaties. However, it would be wrong to make a conclusion that all the member nations of the EU have come to terms with the ECJ’s perception that the EU legislation is the supreme legislation in the land . This means that quite a number of courts have maintained that they could downplay the EU legislation on the grounds of the constitution in certain situations thereby attesting to the fact that there are still many supremacy clause issues.
It needs to be noted that the supremacy clause acts as a safeguard to federalism by making supremacy act as a condition of compliance with regards to law making processes that are prescribed in the constitution . These conditions were established to preserve the governance mandate that the states had through establishing federal legislation relatively hard to adopt as well as by assigning this duty singularly to those who acted depending upon the safeguard of federalism . It should be noted that the supremacy clause appreciated three sources of legislation.
These were the supreme legislation of the nation and the constitution. The third source of legislation is the treaties of the United States . In another place, the constitution stipulates accurate processes to guide the way each of these sources of legislation are adopted since the supreme clause grants the federal constitution absolute authority of all laws. What should be noted is the fact that all these processes particularly need not only the participation but also the consent of the Senate .
Traditionally, these processes functioned towards safeguarding federalism either by delegating to the states a duty in the federal government or by seeing to it that small states acquired an un-proportional influence during the adoption of the supreme legislation of the land since it would be important to recognize and possibly pronounce the influence of the smaller states. This entrenchment not only highlighted the way legislative processes was exclusive as stipulated in the traditional constitution, but it is important to recognize the fact that its relevance even today .
THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE AND CONSTITUTIONAL COMPROMISE
The first supremacy clause issue we will mention is the concept of constitutional compromises and the way it relates to the supremacy clause. The legislative processes of the federation are designed in away as to bar any person, group or faction from acquiring too much power as to capture the legislative procedure . To that extent, the constitution begins by putting in place a legislature having many members. As observed by Jeremy Waldron, legal literature is likely to almost give an indication of compromise in their result of a many-member assembly making up many people of quite radically various interests and histories .