provides no statutory basis for the compact with Pojoaque Pueblo. APPLICABILITY OF FEDERAL LAW The Governor argues that even if he lacked the authority under state law to enter into the compact, it is nonetheless binding upon the State of New Mexico as a matter of federal law. Along these same lines, he also argues that he possesses the authority, as a matter of federal law, to bind the State to the terms of the compact, irrespective of whether he has the authority as a matter of state law. We find the Governor’s argument on these points to be inconsistent with core principles of federalism. The Governor has only such authority as is given to him by our state Constitution and statutes enacted pursuant to it. Cf. Rapp v. Carey, 44 N.Y.2d 157, 404 N.Y.S.2d 565, 375 N.E.2d 745, 750 (1978) (<HOLDING>). We do not agree that Congress, in enacting
holding that neither the new york location of the terrorist attack giving rise to the policyholders claim nor the new yorkbased claims adjustor rendered new york the locus of operative facts because new york was not the site of the contracts execution holding that legislative functions such as powers of zoning and rezoning cannot be delegated holding that the governor of new york has only those powers delegated to him by the state constitution and the statutes holding that the plaintiffs benefits were found in the new york state constitution and vested in the plaintiffs by the terms of a statutory scheme holding that contract signed in new york by promisor from florida and partially performed in florida was governed by new york law because it was executed in new york