The ongoing National government shenanigans regarding grizzly bears, wolves and sage grouse have prompted me to ask a politically incorrect question, i.e. what, exactly, is the Constitutional underpinning of the Endangered Species Act (ESA)?
I can't feature how identifying and protecting endangered species is one of the limited powers given up by the Sovereign States of the Federal Union and assigned to the National government. Without major mental gyrations I can't even imagine how a “penumbra” of authority can be derived from the limited powers assigned to the National government. I will concede only that under our form of Federal Government the National government has unlimited powers (within the constraints of the Bill of Rights) on Federal Territories that have not acquired Statehood, lands formally ceded by the States to the National government such as the District of Columbia, and military forts, arsenals and bases. I have no problem with the National Authorities exercising the provisions of the ESA over these lands to their heart's content.
I contend that on all other lands within the boundaries of the separate and Sovereign States of the Federal Union, the National Government can implement the provisions of the ESA only with at least the implicit consent of each Sovereign State. Should any of the Sovereign States object at any time to this National Government intrusion into their sovereignty, they have the power, nay, the responsibility, to throw the agents of the National Government out on their ears in accordance with the doctrine of Nullification.
