Union and States' Rights: A History and Interpretation of Interposition, Nullification, and Secession 150 Years after Sumter
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Union and States' Rights: A History and Interpretation of Interposition, Nullification, and Secession 150 Years After Sumter. Edited by Neil H. Cogan. Law and Legal Thought Across Disciplines. (Akron, Ohio: University of Akron Press, 2014. Pp. [xii], 299. Paper, $24.95, ISBN 978-1-937378-13-4.) What are we to make of twenty-first-century Americans' rhetorical and legislative efforts for interposition and nullification of federal legislation, especially the statutes that regulate firearms, healthcare, and marijuana? To take a more troubling case, consider threats of separate state secession made by contemporary Americans, including the governor (Rick Perry) of the second-most populous state (Texas)--a state that already tried to secede by force of arms a century and a half ago. Fortunately, we can turn to Union and States' Rights: A History and Interpretation of Interposition, Nullification, and Secession 150 Years After Sumter as a primer on states' rights. This slim volume collects essays written almost exclusively by law professors on various aspects of the interrelated ideas of interposition, nullification, and secession. Interposition is the right of the states to intercede to protect their citizens from the unconstitutional exercise of federal power. Nullification is the right of the states to suspend an unconstitutional federal law by the enactment of a countervailing state law. Secession is the right of a state to leave the Union because of the federal government's breach of the compact. Editor Neil H. Cogan explains that Union and States' Rights addresses fundamental questions about the American Union from historical, legal, political, and social/moral perspectives (p. 1). Since the founding of the American republic, interposition, nullification, and secession have been topics of discussion or objects of fantasy by disaffected political minorities, ranging from the early-nineteenth-century Federalists to the early-twenty-first-century Tea Party adherents, especially when their minority status seems to be more or less permanent. Despite the ugly shadow cast by slavery over secession in particular, advocates of states' rights raise important questions about how to resolve deep-seated and long-lasting disagreements between the states and the federal government. In short, Cogan wants Union and States' Rights to consider what extraordinary options state governments and individuals in those states do have when seeking relief from an unresponsive or even repressive federal government (p. 1). Of course, this is not just an academic question or a uniquely American concern. It is an enduring problem of large, and sometimes small, democracies. The scholars in this volume are concerned with interposition, nullification, and secession in the United States, but the issue of deep political division in a diverse democracy bedevils nation-states across the globe, including Belgium, Canada, Spain, and the United Kingdom. If these disaffected minorities believe that democracy has failed them, their majoritarian compatriots believe they are failing democracy. The essays range from erudite accounts of what James Madison, father of the Constitution and author of the Virginia Resolutions, thought about interposition, nullification, and the federal coercion of states to considerations of how the National Park Service commemorates secession and remembers slavery today at the Fort Sumter National Monument in South Carolina and analysis of the adoption of states' rights rhetoric, complete with veiled allusions to and occasional threats of nullification, by the Tea Party faction of today's Republican Party. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».