The Fallacies of States' Rights
jan 2013 · Harvard University Press
Libër elektronik
256
Faqe
reportVlerësimet dhe komentet nuk janë të verifikuara Mëso më shumë
Rreth këtij libri elektronik
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.
Vlerëso këtë libër elektronik
Na trego se çfarë mendon.
Informacione për leximin
Telefona inteligjentë dhe tabletë
Instalo aplikacionin "Librat e Google Play" për Android dhe iPad/iPhone. Ai sinkronizohet automatikisht me llogarinë tënde dhe të lejon të lexosh online dhe offline kudo që të ndodhesh.
Laptopë dhe kompjuterë
Mund të dëgjosh librat me audio të blerë në Google Play duke përdorur shfletuesin e uebit të kompjuterit.
Lexuesit elektronikë dhe pajisjet e tjera
Për të lexuar në pajisjet me bojë elektronike si p.sh. lexuesit e librave elektronikë Kobo, do të të duhet të shkarkosh një skedar dhe ta transferosh atë te pajisja jote. Ndiq udhëzimet e detajuara në Qendrën e ndihmës për të transferuar skedarët te lexuesit e mbështetur të librave elektronikë.
