Most people mean powers of government not specifically delegated to the federal government when they talk about "states rights".
I think speaking of any branch of Gov't as having 'rights'confuses the reason why we have gov't.
The States have their areas of responsiblities and power as does the Federal gov't.
Neither have 'rights'.
This is what caused so much confusion before the Civil War.
This was Calhoun's notion that the State was itself a sovereign entity and had 'rights'to protect when it was, in fact, a part of the Federal system whose function was to protect individual rights.
Actually, I'm not sure where the term originated. It is quite confusing to most people.
Responsibilities is a much better description.
posted on 10/28/2004 6:57:35 PM PDT
(FREE KERRY'S SCARY bumper sticker .......... http://www.kerrysscary.com/bumper_sticker.php)
To: fortheDeclaration; Happy2BMe; TapTheSource
>>This was Calhoun's notion that the State was itself a sovereign entity and had 'rights'to protect when it was, in fact, a part of the Federal system whose function was to protect individual rights.<<
Exactly, this is why States have their own Constitutions. They determine how the States will protect the individual rights of State citizens from the overbearing federal government.
I am not enough of a historian to say when the last battle of a state vs the feds was. Possibly, here in Nevada when we objected to the Feds dumping the nations spent uranium on our grounds. Yes, we lost the case.
posted on 10/29/2004 5:24:51 AM PDT
(´´Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; They are our teeth for Liberty)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson