Significant FactsIn 1994, Congress passed a bill, with the President's approval, withholding ten percent of federal highway funds from states that did not punish violators of drugs by suspending the driving license for six months. One condition the federal government places on highway grants is that states must suspend driver's licenses for any drug conviction, regardless of severity, including possession of marijuana. However, states have the option to “opt out” by passing their own state law stating that they will not suspend driver's licenses for such violations. The clause was used by Congress in hopes that states would not want to be recognized for allowing drug offenders to keep their licenses, but most states opted out. ProblemBoth California and Utah are suing the Secretary of Transportation to release the funds. The California legislature challenged the federal law in light of the fact that the withholding of federal highway funds was not related to the suspension of driver's licenses and the “opt out” clause was not a rational or uniform national policy. The California legislature claims this requirement is to initiate a debate between the governor and the state legislature. Requiring the governor and legislature to agree or force the legislative majority to override the gubernatorial veto violates the fundamental function of state sovereignty and in particular the absence of a uniform national policy. Utah passes law suspending drug offenders' driver's licenses for all drug violations, however, Utah also decriminalized possession of small amounts of marijuana and redefined the crime as a misdemeanor: "burning without a permit" . The Secretary of Transportation believes that Utah's motivation to decriminalize and redefine the crime violates...... middle of paper...... California until the state complies with the federal condition placed on highway funds, however, the constitutional question regarding the requirement that debate between states over whether to “opt out” be removed as a condition for receiving funds. Removing this option will create a uniform national policy applicable to each state. If this condition is not removed, it is recommended that California receive federal grant funds. Second, Utah has complied with the regulation and therefore federal highway funds should be released. The Secretary of Transportation is violating state sovereignty after Utah complied with its condition on federal funds. Works Cited The United States Constitution Epstein, Lee, and Thomas Walker. Institutional powers and constraints. 8. Thousand Oaks: CQ Press, 2013. Print.