A current update on New York v. United States has to start with the realization that we have NO operational permanent repository, no in progress solution, the majority of past waste from power plants still stored above ground at the generating facility, and the total waste growing at about the rate of 2,000 tons a year. Legally, the federal government is still in the middle of the mess,
With regard to Printz, I suggest the Courts opinion is an interesting read for anyone who wishes a view inside the minds of the judges. They go through a long tortured historical research because they refuse to find any direct answer in the Constitution. To me, When the 10th amendment says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.", that is as far as you need to go. No where in the Constitution does it say that the Federal government has the authority to demand state cooperation in the execution of federal objectives. The tenth amendment is pretty clear to me. If it is not delegated by the Constitution, it does not exist.
If you want to get advanced notice of where the court is going, you have to read their opinions.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Commandeering
Since 1992, the Supreme Court has ruled that the Tenth Amendment prohibits the federal government from forcing states to pass or not pass certain legislation, or to enforce federal law.
New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992)
The federal government would like each state to be responsible for their own nuclear waste. Some are and some are not. Congress has proposed a package of incentives to "encourage" laggards to get on board. The package includes several financial incentives and includes as a last step that the states just be reqiured to take title and possession to all wastes being generated. New York sues on grounds this is in violation of 10th amendment and wins at Supreme Court.
Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997)
Congress puts into law a provision regarding gun sales that requires state personnel to perform the background checks required by the federeal law. This is challenged by the states. The Supreme Court finds the requirement to be unconstitutional.