The first in a series of ten lectures, presented at “The Truth About American History: An Austro-Jeffersonian Perspective” seminar, hosted by the Mises Institute. Recorded 06/20/2005
Thomas Jefferson and the Principles of ’98
Enjoyed This Post?
We cannot succeed without your help, as we will never accept government grants or handouts. Please help us by investing in the Constitution and freedom today!
This entire lecture serious is great viewing/listening material. We’ll post more from time to time as well.
You can also read the text of the ’98 resolutions here:
Kentucky Resolutions
Virginia Resolution
Excellent video and very well presented, thank you, Mr. Woods.
Maybe I missed it but I didn’t see/hear a conclusion. I think there is no “constitutional†conclusion to the argument on State’s Rights. The State and federal governments have no constitutional Rights, they have powers.
The People have Rights and according to the Constitution the People have the Right (of Conscience) to nullify any and or all government legislation (pertaining to one court case) but only when serving on a Citizen Jury; reference Amendment 5, 6, and 7 of the Bill of Rights.
Allan
Allan – you make a great point here, and a very important one. I’m a bit of a stickler for it as well.
States do not have “rights” – only individuals have rights. States and state governments act on behalf of the people living in their territory.
Michael – Thanks, I find it not so easy to win converts away from political rhetoric to the Constitution’s side of the affair. I see the Constitution and government as opposites or enemies. The People’s side of the affair is the Constitution. Political rhetoric, or issues, are like carrots dangling in front of a donkey, where the People are the donkey. Political issues lead the People away from the Constitution.
I wonder if your statement that the States act on behalf of the People is “constitutionally†correct, or a carrot. Consider the Oath of Office in Article VI; State Officials are required to “support†the Constitution. So on behalf of the People must be to support the Constitution and anything repugnant to the Constitution, therefore, cannot be on behalf of the People.
Allan
As far as nullification, what if the Federal Supreme Court rules on something that the people feel is unconstituitonal?
Derek,
Forget about the Supreme Court (SC) because its decisions have no bearing at all on the People or the Constitution. For a fact though “Congress” uses SC decisions against the People.
http://www.confederatestatesofamerica.org/index.html
Check out that URL and let me know what you think?
Allan – ahampton@suddenlink.net
Derek,
Forget about the Supreme Court (SC) because its decisions have no bearing at all on the People or the Constitution. For a fact though “Congress” uses SC decisions against the People.
Allan