Intrastatutory Federalism and Statutory Interpretation: State Implementation of Federal Law in Health Reform and Beyond

State implementation of federal law is commonplace, but has been largely ignored by the interpretive doctrines of legislation and administrative law. We have no Chevron, federalism canon, or anything else for state implementation, nor any doctrines that ask how Congress's decisions to delegate implementation duties to states should affect how ambiguous statutes should be interpreted. For theories of federalism, state implementation raises a different question, namely, whether this "intrastatutory federalism" -an informal federalism that comes from the inside of federal statutes -is something that doctrine should protect. The prevailing functional and sovereignty accounts of federalism seem less relevant for a federalism that comes at the grace of Congress; this federalism belongs to the domain of statutory interpretation. This Essay argues that state implementation of federal law plays many different roles, and that those differences should affect both how statutes are interpreted and how they are conceived from a federalism perspective. Sometimes state implementation effectuates traditional federalism values like experimentation, but at other times it seems to serve more nationalizing functions, like statutory entrenchment and even federal law encroachment. This variety poses challenges for legislation doctrine, because the prevailing canons of interpretation are not designed to capture such differences, and it illustrates that the broad category of cooperative federalism is more nuanced than commonly acknowledged. AUTHO R. Associate Professor of Law and Milton Handler Fellow, Columbia Law School. Many of the ideas in this Essay arose in response to Bill Eskridge and John Ferejohn's terrific book, A Republic ofStatutes, and also took shape in conversations with Alan Weil. Many thanks to Bill, John, and Alan, and also to Bruce Ackerman, Akhil Amar, Tom Baker, Jim Brudney, Meir Feder, Barry Friedman, Josh Geltzer, Michael Graetz, Katie Hall, Rick Hills, John Jacobi, Sandy Johnson, Tim Jost, Ben Kerschberg, A Klevorick, Anita Krishnakumar, Joe Landau, John Manning, Jerry Mashaw, Tom Merrill, Robert Post, Judith Resnik, Sara Rosenbaum, Ted Ruger, Robert Schapiro, Catherine Sharkey, Kevin Stack, Peter Strauss, John Witt, and Ernie Young; workshop participants at Columbia, Fordham, Ohio State University, University of Maryland, University of Pennsylvania, Vanderbilt, and Yale law schools; The Yale Lawjournal editors; and especially Richard Briffault, Sam Bray, Robert Ferguson, Heather Gerken, Gillian Metzger, Henry Monaghan, Anne Joseph O'Connell, Nate Persily, and Chuck Sabel. Nathan Brownback, Alexandra Golden, Richard Lee, James Lyons, Stephanie Wang, Caroline White, Amy Wolf, and particularly Michelle Diamond, Mallory Jensen, and Scott Stifler provided excellent research assistance.