The Fallacies of States' Rights
ene 2013 · Harvard University Press
Libro electrónico
256
Páginas
reportLas calificaciones y opiniones no están verificadas. Más información
Acerca de este libro electrónico
The idea that “states’ rights” restrain national power is riding high in American judicial and popular opinion. Here, Sotirios A. Barber shows how arguments for states’ rights, from the days of John C. Calhoun to the present, have offended common sense, logic, and bedrock constitutional principles.
To begin with, states’ rights federalism cannot possibly win the debate with national federalism owing to the very forum in which the requisite argument must occur—a national one, thanks to the Civil War—and the ordinary rules of practical argumentation. Further, the political consequences of this self-defeating logic can only hasten the loss of American sovereignty to international economic forces. Both philosophical and practical reasons compel us to consider two historical alternatives to states’ rights federalism. In the federalism of John Marshall, the nation’s most renowned jurist, the national government’s duty to ensure security, prosperity, and other legitimate national ends must take precedence over all conflicting exercises of state power. In “process” federalism, the Constitution protects the states by securing their roles in national policy making and other national decisions. Barber opts for Marshall’s federalism, but the contest is close, and his analysis takes the debate into new, fertile territory.
Affirming the fundamental importance of the Preamble, Barber advocates a conception of the Constitution as a charter of positive benefits for the nation. It is not, in his view, a contract among weak separate sovereigns whose primary function is to protect people from the central government, when there are greater dangers to confront.
To begin with, states’ rights federalism cannot possibly win the debate with national federalism owing to the very forum in which the requisite argument must occur—a national one, thanks to the Civil War—and the ordinary rules of practical argumentation. Further, the political consequences of this self-defeating logic can only hasten the loss of American sovereignty to international economic forces. Both philosophical and practical reasons compel us to consider two historical alternatives to states’ rights federalism. In the federalism of John Marshall, the nation’s most renowned jurist, the national government’s duty to ensure security, prosperity, and other legitimate national ends must take precedence over all conflicting exercises of state power. In “process” federalism, the Constitution protects the states by securing their roles in national policy making and other national decisions. Barber opts for Marshall’s federalism, but the contest is close, and his analysis takes the debate into new, fertile territory.
Affirming the fundamental importance of the Preamble, Barber advocates a conception of the Constitution as a charter of positive benefits for the nation. It is not, in his view, a contract among weak separate sovereigns whose primary function is to protect people from the central government, when there are greater dangers to confront.
Califica este libro electrónico
Cuéntanos lo que piensas.
Información de lectura
Smartphones y tablets
Instala la app de Google Play Libros para Android y iPad/iPhone. Como se sincroniza de manera automática con tu cuenta, te permite leer en línea o sin conexión en cualquier lugar.
Laptops y computadoras
Para escuchar audiolibros adquiridos en Google Play, usa el navegador web de tu computadora.
Lectores electrónicos y otros dispositivos
Para leer en dispositivos de tinta electrónica, como los lectores de libros electrónicos Kobo, deberás descargar un archivo y transferirlo a tu dispositivo. Sigue las instrucciones detalladas que aparecen en el Centro de ayuda para transferir los archivos a lectores de libros electrónicos compatibles.
