What is true about the force and effect of law in compact states?

In the context of compact states, the assertion that rules are legally binding is accurate. Compact states operate under agreements that typically require member states to adhere to specific legal and regulatory standards for a cohesive administration and management of shared resources or issues. These compacts carry the force of law, meaning that the rules established through these agreements must be followed by all participating states. Compliance ensures that the intended benefits of the compact are achieved and that there exists legal cohesiveness among the states involved.

In contrast, the idea that rules are optional or can be disregarded undermines the purpose of these legal agreements. Since the intent of compacts is to create enforceable guidelines that states agree upon, treating them as optional would jeopardize the commitment and cooperation between states. The notion that a supermajority is necessary for enforcement does not accurately reflect how compacts typically function, as they are generally binding once ratified by the states involved. Therefore, the concept of the rules being legally binding encapsulates the fundamental nature of compacts in fostering cooperation and compliance among member states.