Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- authoring:cospwiki:cospdocuments:nullification-answered [2015/10/20 23:39] – [Constitutional Structure and the Problem of Unconstitutional Laws] Oliver Wolcott
+++ authoring:cospwiki:cospdocuments:nullification-answered [2015/10/22 11:36] – [What is the Proper Remedy for Unchecked Abuses of Power?] Oliver Wolcott
@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 In Madison's Report of 1800, he clarified his stance on "nullification" by specifically declaring that individual states did //not// have the right to invalidate federal laws. He explained that state resolutions (like the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions) could only be used to express the state's conviction that a federal law was unconstitutional, which might be useful for mobilizing public opinion to persuade federal officials to overturn the law.
-Finally, in a letter to Edward Everett in 1830, Madison provided further guidance on this point by describing the Article V Convention of States to propose amendments as "the final resort within the purview of the Constitution" for correcting usurpations and abuses of power by the federal government. In other words, Article V is the //ultimate// nullification procedure.
+Finally, in a [[historicaldocuments:letters:everett1830#everett1830|letter to Edward Everett in 1830]], Madison provided further guidance on this point by describing the Article V Convention of States to propose amendments as "the final resort within the purview of the Constitution" for correcting usurpations and abuses of power by the federal government. In other words, Article V is the //ultimate// nullification procedure.
 In their wisdom, the drafters of the Constitution provided us with a remedy for abuses of federal power that are left unchecked by the federal judiciary. It is time for us to apply that remedy by invoking Article V's procedure to call for a Convention of the States to propose amendments that will restore the original meaning of the Constitution.