Thomas Jefferson and the Principles of ’98

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

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

As far as nullification, what if the Federal Supreme Court rules on something that the people feel is unconstituitonal?

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

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

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

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

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