Under McCulloch vs Maryland can the Feds do anything?
<p>Under McCulloch vs Maryland (The Bank of United States case) which held that the supremacy clause precludes state taxation of Federal functions; can States and localities enforce traffic rules against federal officials? Zoning laws against federal buildings?</p>

<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCulloch_v._Maryland" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>McCulloch v Maryland</em>, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316 (1819)</a> does not give federal officials unlimited power. But it does mean that when when such officials are carrying out properly authorized constitutional functions, state law cannot be used to prevent or regulate them, unless Congress has so provided.</p>
<p>Some examples:</p>
<ul>
<li>A state cannot require a postal employee to hold a valid state driver's license to drive a postal vehicle.  (This dates from when the post office was a direct federal agency. Postal regulations were soon changed to require that employees assigned as drivers hold valid licenses.)</li>
<li>States may not impose property taxes on federal buildings or land. However there is often an agreed &quot;payment in lieu of taxes&quot; (PILOT). Also, the Federal Government needs state permission to purchase property within a state.</li>
<li>States or subdivisions of states (such as cities or towns) may not impose zoning rules on Federal property. However the agency involved usually goes through a hearing and negotiation process not much different from what it would be if the zoning laws were binding.</li>
<li>States may not tax the interest on Federal securities such as US Savings Bonds or Treasury Notes.</li>
<li>State minimum wage laws do not apply to Federal employees, unless Congress permits them to.</li>
</ul>
<p>Many other examples could be cited.</p>
<p>The main restraints are:</p>
<ol>
<li>This does not apply to things the Federal Government has no power to do, or that no Federal law has authorized. But the scope of Federal power is now very broad.</li>
<li>Political factors. If such exemptions are unpopular, there may be sufficient pressure to change federal policy or law.</li>
<li>Practicality. It is often easier to allow state regulations to operate, granting Federal permission, than to create parallel machinery. By requiring postal drivers to have state licenses, the Post Office did not need to implement its own system of testing and regulation.</li>
</ol>

constitutional-law us-constitution us-supreme-court federalism