Influence of the Resolutions Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions

1 influence of resolutions

1.1 nullification crisis
1.2 compact theory
1.3 school desegregation

influence of resolutions

although new england states rejected kentucky , virginia resolutions in 1798–99, several years later, state governments of massachusetts, connecticut, , rhode island threatened ignore embargo act of 1807 based on authority of states stand laws deemed states unconstitutional. rhode island justified position on embargo act based on explicit language of interposition. however, none of these states passed resolution nullifying embargo act. instead, challenged in court, appealed congress repeal, , proposed several constitutional amendments.

several years later, massachusetts , connecticut asserted right test constitutionality when instructed send militias defend coast during war of 1812. connecticut , massachusetts questioned embargo passed in 1813. both states objected, including statement massachusetts legislature, or general court:

a power regulate commerce abused, when employed destroy it; , manifest , voluntary abuse of power sanctions right of resistance, as direct , palpable usurpation. sovereignty reserved states, reserved protect citizens acts of violence united states, purposes of domestic regulation. spurn idea free, sovereign , independent state of massachusetts reduced mere municipal corporation, without power protect people, , defend them oppression, whatever quarter comes. whenever national compact violated, , citizens of state oppressed cruel , unauthorized laws, legislature bound interpose power, , wrest oppressor victim.

massachusetts , connecticut, along representatives of other new england states, held convention in 1814 issued statement asserting right of interposition. statement did not attempt nullify federal law. rather, made appeal congress provide defense of new england , proposed several constitutional amendments.

the nullification crisis

during nullification crisis of 1828–1833, south carolina passed ordinance of nullification purporting nullify 2 federal tariff laws. south carolina asserted tariff of 1828 , tariff of 1832 beyond authority of constitution, , therefore null, void, , no law, nor binding upon state, officers or citizens . andrew jackson issued proclamation against doctrine of nullification, stating: consider…the power annul law of united states, assumed 1 state, incompatible existence of union, contradicted expressly letter of constitution, unauthorized spirit, inconsistent every principle on founded, , destructive of great object formed. denied right secede: constitution…forms government not league.…to state may @ pleasure secede union united states not nation.

james madison opposed south carolina s position on nullification. madison argued had never intended virginia resolution suggest each individual state had power nullify act of congress. madison wrote: follows, no view of subject, nullification of law of u. s. can contended, belong rightfully single state, 1 of parties constitution; state not ceasing avow adherence constitution. plainer contradiction in terms, or more fatal inlet anarchy, cannot imagined. madison explained when virginia legislature passed virginia resolution, interposition contemplated concurring , cooperating interposition of states, not of single state.…[t]he legislature expressly disclaimed idea declaration of state, law of u. s. unconstitutional, had effect of annulling law. madison went on argue purpose of virginia resolution had been elicit cooperation other states in seeking change through means provided in constitution, such amendment.

the compact theory

the supreme court rejected compact theory in several nineteenth century cases, undermining basis kentucky , virginia resolutions. in cases such martin v. hunter s lessee, mcculloch v. maryland, , texas v. white, court asserted constitution established directly people, rather being compact among states. abraham lincoln rejected compact theory saying constitution binding contract among states , no contract can changed unilaterally 1 party.

school desegregation

in 1954, supreme court decided brown v. board of education, ruled segregated schools violate constitution. many people in southern states opposed brown decision. james j. kilpatrick, editor of richmond news leader, wrote series of editorials urging massive resistance integration of schools. kilpatrick, relying on virginia resolution, revived idea of interposition states constitutional basis resisting federal government action. number of southern states, including arkansas, louisiana, virginia, , florida, subsequently passed interposition , nullification laws in effort prevent integration of schools.

in case of cooper v. aaron, supreme court unanimously rejected arkansas effort use nullification , interposition. supreme court held under supremacy clause, federal law controlling , states did not have power evade application of federal law. court rejected contention arkansas legislature , governor had power nullify brown decision.

in similar case arising louisiana s interposition act, bush v. orleans parish school board, supreme court affirmed decision of federal district court rejected interposition. district court stated: conclusion clear interposition not constitutional doctrine. if taken seriously, illegal defiance of constitutional authority. otherwise, amounted no more protest, escape valve through legislators blew off steam relieve tensions. …however solemn or spirited, interposition resolutions have no legal efficacy.