Barber asks how it is that Congress can be given a general duty to use whatever means necessary and proper in the international system to ensure the well-being of America’s citizenry, and be denied this duty domestically (99)? He argues that Congress can encroach on the states when it has a legitimate reason, and that the states have the right to freely regulate something when Congress has not passed a national policy or has decentralized the issue (116, 104). Why? Because of the Supremacy Clause. Barber claims, “the Supremacy Clause favors Congress over the states when congress is pursuing its ends,” (116). And it is the Supremacy Clause that “speaks against” the abbreviation of Congress’ enumerated powers like that of the Commerce Clause (Barber 116). Madison even described the U.S. Constitution as the “one operating in all the states,” (Letter to Edward Everett). If it thus holds that the national constitution applies within each state, how would it be logical to claim that federal law, with its basis in the national constitution, does not apply within the states? The national government has the right to negate state law but the states do not have the right to negate national