If Parliament enacts a law, and state governments refuse to implement it, what is the impact on the functioning of the Constitution and the federal structure of our polity? This is a question that has emerged in recent times with increasing urgency and frequency. The blame does not lie with the Constitution. Its language is crystal clear, delineating a Union of States, where the powers of the central government and those of the states are clearly defined.

The recent passage of the Waqf Bill by Parliament has reignited this contentious debate: Can state governments refuse to implement a central law if they believe it infringes upon their autonomy or contradicts their policy priorities? The question strikes at the heart of India’s federal structure, testing the delicate balance between parliamentary sovereignty and state rights.

The Waqf Bill, aimed at streamlining the administration of waqf properties and enhancing oversight, has been met with resistance from some states, particularly those governed by opposition parties. Their defiance raises fundamental constitutional and political questions—does India’s federalism permit states to reject central laws, and what are the consequences of such resistance for governance and national unity?

India’s Constitution establishes a........

© News18