CONLAW NOTES 10/23

Martins vs Hunters-Laisee
-did i miss this? wtf

Articles of Confederation- states are sovereign explicitly
Constitution- no explicit mention of sovereignty, more sovereignty to the federal govt

virginia and kentucky resolutions were interesting as well... not exactly sure how...
-federal govt was created BY THE STATES, states hold the power
-comes pretty close to saying that states have a right to secede
CURRENTLY there really isnt any right to secede at all... the civil war NEVER HAPPENED...

Jefferson and Madison were arguing for Nullification and Interposition
-nullification- the states have the right to ignore federal laws if they dont agree with them
-interposition- an effort by a state to protect its citizens from the federal government
-under articles of confederation, taxes, laws, etc were all managed by the state
-under constitution, federal law is supreme
-best recent example of interposition recently was during Vietnam War
-1972, Massachusetts decided that men from their state would not be sent to vietnam until the Congress declares war on N. Vietnam
martins vs hunters-laisee REJECTS nullification and interposition outright

interpreting the constitution is essentially just determining the meaning of words
-interpretation is different across time, meanings change over the years... hokie dokie
-constitution has become a developing one, original intent is not really the overarching principle
-there are whole lots of broad phrases requiring interpretation
Constitution was a skeletal document
-some things were unambiguous, others were silent, and still others were intentionally vague

two real interpretations of the constitution
-original intent
-living document