A Remedy for Intrusive Government: Tom E. Woods’ Nullification
I thought Meltdown would be a difficult act to follow. But Tom E. Woods has struck again
with a work that is as timely and necessary for our understanding as his previous book. Whereas Meltdown scholarly and diligently
provided sound economic sense and delineated the causes of the financial crisis that took place during Bush’s regime,
Nullification discusses a powerful and constitutional mechanism by which individual states can grind to a halt
government intrusion into their sovereignty.
The call to a legitimate use of state’s rights is the thrust of the book. And throughout the
work, Woods clarifies several misconceptions about the 10th Amendment, states’ rights, and the use of nullification. First,
he establishes the historical precedents of nullification, explicating its historical origins and demonstrating that it is
nothing new to our history brought upon the scene by so-called neo-confederates. Second, he explodes the myth that states’
rights and nullification are mechanisms used primarily to safeguard segregation and racism. In fact, he shows that states
utilized the 10th Amendment and nullification for the exact opposite reasons. Finally, he shows that the notion of
union has been turned on its head through decades of allowing federal government to intrude upon and usurp rights guaranteed
by the Constitution to individual states. What is and is not constitutional should indeed become a legitimate debate. A legitimate
debate as well is whether or not the Supreme Court should have the final say on what is constitutional.
What is nullification? Nullification is
a constitutional mechanism by which individual states exercise their 10th Amendment rights to declare whether or not
a federal law is constitutional and will be recognized in particular states. If a state believes that a federal law is unconstitutional,
the 10th Amendment grants that state the power to declare the law null and void for that state. The mechanism by which states
can utilize nullification involve the political leaders of a state writing a resolve that a law is considered null and void
in their state.
Nullification has been utilized throughout history by several states, and Woods opens that history to us in his book.
One of the first uses of Nullification came with what are called the Principles of ’98. In the late 18th
Century, people in the states became frightened that France was going to attack or subvert the new American government in
some fashion. Because of this fear, the American people became suspicious of anything that or anyone who could be considered
subversive. Such an attitude has emerged time and time again throughout our history. In 1798, the fear gave rise to the Alien and Sedition Acts. The Sedition Act granted the federal government to imprison anyone who criticized the government, and particularly
the President. The Alien Act called on people in the states to turn over suspicious foreigners and any non-citizen to the federal
government for deportation. Two states in the new republic stood against the Alien and Sedition Acts: Virginia and Kentucky.
James Madison drafted the resolves that declared the Alien
and Sedition Acts null and void in the state
of Virginia in 1798. The Kentucky Resolutions followed in 1799 and was the first document to use the term nullification. One cannot help but think that those who penned these resolutions would countenance such legislation as today’s
Patriot Act with high suspicion, and would interpret the deportation of those individuals who have lived and
worked here for years as an extreme threat on individual liberty. The politics of neo-conservatism most assuredly does not
align with the challenge that Virginia and Kentucky leveled at the Alien and Sedition Acts.
In their support of the assault on states’
rights, a common rhetorical tool used by the left these days is to equate states’ rights with the history of slavery
and segregation. Progressives castigate those who look to nullification to halt the growth of centralized power with such
epithets as neo-confederates or racists. Woods’ scholarly treatment of nullification again shows how such
rhetoric flies in the face of history. Prior to the Civil War, the federal government enacted the Runaway Slave Act. According
to this law, if runaway slaves were encountered in a free state, they were to be sequestered and returned to their lawful
owners in the slave state from which they escaped. The north instituted nullification to defy the act. States such as Wisconsin
declared the Runaway Slave Act unconstitutional and null and void in the state. Contrary to rhetoric, northern states utilized
the 10th Amendment to defy federal law that they viewed as unconstitutional. The notion of states’ rights has unfortunately
hijacked by segregationists for racial reasons. It’s time to take the notion back from such people and utilize states’
rights for their constitutional purpose: to prevent the rise of a centralized power that usurps inalienable rights.
One would think
that Thomas Jefferson, who spearheaded the Virginia Resolutions
to nullify the Alien and Sedition Acts, would
be the last president to stir the ire of the states who might view him as usurping their sovereign rights. However, true to
Lord Acton’s dictum, when Jefferson became president, he too crossed the line with what has become known as Jefferson’s Embargo. The act prevented export and import businesses from carrying on commerce with certain countries in Europe. The embargo
devastated the shipping industry, particularly in the northern states. They could not pursue business with those countries
with whom they had formerly been carrying on commerce. Consequently, the northern states, one by one, defied the embargo,
declared it as unconstitutional, and challenged the federal government’s right to intrude upon their commerce. One cannot
help but hypothesize how these business people during Jefferson’s time would react to the federal government’s
usurping of an entire market such as healthcare, the bailing out of failed businesses, and the seizing of assets from businesses
for purpose of regulation. It is high time that nullification be engendered to combat such unconstitutional acts of the federal
government.
As enlightening as the facts are, Woods’ work goes beyond a mere history of the use of nullification. He demonstrates
through the use of historical documents the zealous defense with which states acted to guard their sovereignty against an
ever encroaching centralized power. The view that the states took of the union in colonial times is much different today,
no doubt due to the rise of a centralized federal government and the belief that people hold regarding the necessity of such
a vested authority. In drafting the Constitution, the colonials had one thing in mind: the document was to be written law
that spelled out the mechanisms by which the rise of a centralized government would be prevented. The union depended upon
these mechanisms being in place to safeguard the sovereignty of each state. Once those sovereignties were undermined, then
accordingly the union was dissolved. The colonials did not view the so-called union as a supreme power that oversaw the individual
states. Rather, the individual states held that they were the creators of the union, and it existed at their discretion, so
long as a centralized power did not encroach upon their sovereignty. Today, we are light years away from understanding this
immense distrust that the colonials had for a centralized government. One wonders if such a mindset can be restored in this
country.
Tom
E. Woods provides a wealth of information in his work, Nullification. In addition to highlighting the idea of nullification, Woods provides
eleven historical documents whereby states engaged in acts of 10th Amendment defiance, putting in writing their
constitutional reasons for doing so. The question that is bound to emerge for those who read this work along with the documents
that Woods provides is: How did we lose this piece of history and end up in the place we are today with a massive federal
government that intrudes upon nearly every nook and corner of our lives? Woods opens his work with a chapter entitled, “The
Return of a Forbidden Idea.” For those who believe that government is to manage and design our lives, nullification
is indeed a forbidden idea. For those who believe in personal liberty, nullification is an idea that must be awakened and
brought to light from our country’s historical past. Woods’ Nullification is a loud, ringing call for such
an awakening.
Book Reviewed:
Woods, T. E. (2010). Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st
Century. Washington DC: Regnery Publishing.
J. Victor Jones, Jr.
Book Reviewed October 2010
