Yesterday, the Court ruled unanimously (8-0, with Justice Thomas sitting out) that, for the purposes of diversity, a national bank is located in the state where it has headquarters. The result of Wachovia Bank, N. A. v. Schmidt conforms to federalism principles nicely, as it precludes an interstate regulatory war fought in fifty state courts.

The Court’s decision in the highly-publicized Gonzales v. Oregon was not so clear-cut. Justice Kennedy wrote for a six-member majority that the Controlled Substances Act does not allow the US Attorney General to block the Oregon Death With Dignity Act by prosecuting doctors who assist suicide. On the face of it, this appears a victory for federalism. But appearances may deceive: the decision refrains from broad Constitutional claims regarding federal authority over the states. Instead, the opinion provides a narrow statutory interpretation that leaves to the states (rather than the Attorney General) the authority to define “medical practices” in the absence of a clear Congressional statement.

Justice Scalia dissented, with Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Thomas joining. Justice Thomas also wrote a separate dissent contrasting this opinion with Gonzales v. Raich.