Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Non-Sequitur
But even Justice Wilson agreed that there were limits on a state’s sovereignty.

Salmon P. Chase disagreed, asserting in 1854 'we have rights which the federal government must not invade - rights superior to its power, on which our sovereignty depends; and we do mean to assert these rights against all tyrannical assumptions of authority.'

1,183 posted on 05/30/2007 12:13:40 PM PDT by 4CJ (Annoy a liberal, honour Christians and our gallant Confederate dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 962 | View Replies ]


To: 4CJ
Salmon P. Chase disagreed, asserting in 1854 'we have rights which the federal government must not invade

Ironically, what Chase was referring to was the right of states to hobble federal fugitive slave laws via habeas corpus, and specifically the case of a runaway slave named Anderson. Oh, and the speech was from Chase's reelection campaign of 1857, not 1854.

1,192 posted on 05/30/2007 12:45:37 PM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1183 | View Replies ]

To: 4CJ
Salmon P. Chase disagreed, asserting in 1854 'we have rights which the federal government must not invade - rights superior to its power, on which our sovereignty depends; and we do mean to assert these rights against all tyrannical assumptions of authority.'

I don't think that any one is saying that states did not have rights. But I also don't think Salmon Chase is saying that there are no limits on a state's sovereignty. It's hard to say with the partial quote you've provided.

1,197 posted on 05/30/2007 2:17:02 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1183 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson