Chapter 18 – Intergovernmental Relationships
18.4 The Dillon Rule vs. Home Rule
The relationship between state and local governments in the United States is defined by two key concepts: the Dillon Rule and Home Rule.
The Dillon Rule, created by Judge John Forrest Dillon in the late 1800s, says that local governments only have the powers that the state government gives them. This means that state governments have more control, and local governments have to follow state laws very closely. This ruling by an Iowa Supreme Court Justice has been used for a long time as a legal guideline to show how state and local governments should work together. While the states have the main control, they should also give local governments some freedom to manage their own communities.
To give local governments more say over their affairs, states can grant them Home Rule status. This concept allows municipalities to create charters that enable them to manage their own affairs independently, if their actions do not conflict with state laws. Home Rule is designed to provide local governments with the flexibility to address local issues more effectively. For example, Ohio’s Constitution permits municipalities to adopt Home Rule charters, granting them the power to exercise local self-government and enforce local regulations that are not inconsistent with general state laws.
The application of Home Rule in Ohio has led to significant local government reforms, particularly in response to corruption scandals. For example, Cuyahoga County adopted a Home Rule charter in 2010 to address corruption and improve government efficiency. This charter established a new form of government with an elected county executive and council, replacing the previous system that was prone to corruption and inefficiency. Similarly, Summit County adopted a Home Rule charter in the 1970s following a major scandal, demonstrating how Home Rule can be used to enhance accountability and governance at the local level.
While Home Rule empowers some local governments to tailor their policies to better serve their communities, make no mistake that the state has the final say.
Marijuana, minimum wage, and plastic bags: states across the country have intervened on these issues and more. Watch the following video from Ballotpedia’s Elizabeth Moore to learn how states preempt local authority:
YouTube URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KebxRqQTTps
Duration: 2:54
Again, state preemption occurs when state law overrides or limits the authority of local governments to regulate certain activities by prohibiting local ordinances. This principle is rooted in the idea that local governments derive their powers from the state and must comply with state laws and constitutions. Remember, state officials can preempt local government ordinances based on their political preferences. They have that authority.
Foundational Facts
The relationship between state and local governments in Ohio is shaped by the Dillon Rule and Home Rule. The Dillon Rule, developed in the late 1800s, holds that local governments have only the powers explicitly granted to them by the state.
In contrast, Ohio’s Home Rule Amendment, adopted in 1912 and outlined in Article XVIII of the Ohio Constitution, allows municipalities to create charters and manage their own affairs as long as their actions don’t conflict with state law. This flexibility empowers Ohio’s cities and villages to address local issues directly, but the state still retains ultimate authority, particularly through state preemption, which can override local ordinances on issues like minimum wage and marijuana regulation.
Reference
Sracic, Paul A., and William C. Binning. 2015. Chapter 9 – Direct Democracy in Ohio in Ohio Government and Politics. Washington DC: CQ Press.
