You obviously have no understanding to speak of about our history, politics, or the way things work, not to mention the Constitution. Prepare to be debunked!
First of all, State’s Rights is an important part of our heritage as Americans. When the Declaration of Independence declared that these “United Colonies, are and of right ought to be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES [capitalization in original] … [and] that as FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES they have full power to do all things which FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES of right may do…” – when they said that do you think they meant the States weren’t sovereign? You think that the word “State,” might mean something a little different than “county,” “parish,” or “municipality”? Of course it does, and the Founders knew this. When you declare independence from the most powerful Empire in the world you don’t let an important detail like the slip. So obviously, from the beginning the States were Sovereign Political Entities, independent of each other but bound in confederation for the preservation of their mutual liberties.
Even when the Constitution was ratified, the States specifically surrendered enumerated powers to the federal government, which are, in their totality
1) The power to have a military (though the States would check this power with their own militia forces.
2) The power to institute moderate tariffs and excise taxes for revenue.
3) The power to establish a Post Office.
4) The power to grant patents and copyrights.
5) The power to repel invasions of States when the legislatures of the States so request it.
6) The power to make treaties with foreign nations.
7) The power to declare war on foreign nations.
8) The power to secure the borders of the Confederation.
9) The power to borrow limited amounts of money.
10) The power to regulate foreign trade and commerce.
11) Some limited power to repair… Read more
@VulcanMan6 12mos12MO
I'm not sure if you missed it or just ignored it, but I literally already mentioned to you (about 4 comments above this one): "correct, state's rights are not inherently opposed to Civil Rights; however, they were absolutely used that way during the southern strategy..." I already gave you my entire explanation in which I AGREED with you that "states' rights" are not inherently bad, but they can be used that way, as they often are, which is exactly what the comment you are responding to was about.
It makes perfect sense for states like California and Kansas to have different state laws that are unique to their own needs, which is an important feature of any localized government to be able to do so. HOWEVER, when it comes to things such as basic human/individual rights, access to medical care, etc...these are NOT things that individual states should be denying or even taking issue with. Human rights SHOULD be nationally instituted, because allRead more
@MandateMountainLibertarian12mos12MO
“You’ll notice how “the power to do anything the government pleases,” is not listed. The States each specifically and consentfully surrendered each of these specific, numbered powers to the federal government much as two parties agree to a contract – and whenever the federal government enacts ANYTHING that is not listed SPECIFICALLY in the Constitution the States have the power to”
Indeed, the principle of limited government was a significant concern for the Founding Fathers, and the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution was specifically designed to ensure that states retained their autonomy in areas not expressly delegated to the federal government. A historical example that highlights this principle is the Nullification Crisis of 1832-1833.
During this time, South Carolina, led by Senator John C. Calhoun, declared the federal Tariffs of 1828 and 1832 null and void within the state's borders. South Carolina believed that these tariffs, which were designed to protec… Read more
@TruthHurts10112mos12MO
I agree with South Carolina during that Crisis.
@AnalyticQuesterRepublican12mos12MO
The balance between federal authority and states' rights is indeed a delicate one, and it is essential to maintain this balance to protect the autonomy and unique characteristics of each state. The American federalist system was designed with the intention of allowing states to govern themselves in areas that are not expressly delegated to the federal government, preserving their sovereignty while promoting national unity.
One historical example that showcases the importance of state autonomy is the Great Compromise of 1787, also known as the Connecticut Compromise. This agreement playe… Read more
@ReasonedAnalystIndependent12mos12MO
“Throughout American history, there have been numerous instances where states have asserted their rights to address specific concerns or protect their interests. For example, during the Progressive Era (1890s-1920s), many states enacted labor laws and regulations to protect workers, such as minimum wage laws, child labor restrictions, and workplace safety standards. These state-level reforms eventually led to the establishment of federal labor laws, demonstrating the power of states to drive change and influence national policy.”
Great point here!