I have no argument with the Thomas quotation since the use of the Commerce Clause had gotten out of hand and needed another look at it. The court could review the fedlaw in regard to this and decide against it. That is the way the Constitution meant for the system to work.
Nullification has never been valid and never can be and still have the Constitution be the law of the land. It wasn't valid for South Carolina in 1830 or Montana in 2005.
Madison had slipped away from his Nationalist beginnings by 1829 and his original belief that the states were a positive detrement to National development and should be eliminated. The Constitutional Convention was called as much for economic reasons as political according to many.
They can indeed, but the can't do it spontaneously. There has to be a case to base it on. This may provide the basis for such a case.
Madison had slipped away from his Nationalist beginnings by 1829 and his original belief that the states were a positive detrement to National development and should be eliminated. The Constitutional Convention was called as much for economic reasons as political according to many.
That may be, but his observatsion on the original intent of the Commerce Clause remain, and help establish the basis for determining that Congress' use of the Commerce Clause has indeed exceed the authority granted to it by the representatives of the States that transferred that power.