3. Unconstitutional Acts are Void
If government enacts laws or policies that exceed its constitutional authority, those acts are VOID and have no legitimate force. James Otis laid this foundation in 1761:
"An act against the constitution is void."
Thomas Jefferson carried this principle forward in 1774, stating that unconstitutional acts do not suddenly become valid just because they are enforced:
"The true ground on which we declare these acts void is, that the British parliament has no right to exercise authority over us."
Alexander Hamilton reinforced this idea in Federalist No. 78, explaining that accepting unconstitutional acts would turn the system upside down:
"To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master."
Simply put, unconstitutional acts carry no lawful authority—whether the government acknowledges that or not.
4. Words on Paper Aren’t Enough
Recognizing an act as unconstitutional and calling it void is not enough. If people treat unconstitutional acts as valid, government will continually ignore constitutional limits.
Alexander Hamilton warned against this in Federalist No. 33:
"These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such."
Algernon Sidney, a major influence on the American Revolutionaries, put it even more bluntly:
"That which is not just is not law, and that which is not law ought not to be obeyed."
The Founders understood that allowing unconstitutional acts to remain in force is no different from legitimizing them. This is why Patrick Henry, in response to the Stamp Act, argued that Virginians were not bound to comply with unconstitutional taxation:
"The inhabitants of this Colony are not bound to yield Obedience to any Law or Ordinance whatever, designed to impose any Taxation whatsoever upon them, other than the Laws or Ordinances of the General Assembly aforesaid."
The First Continental Congress echoed this view in 1774:
"To these grievous acts and measures Americans cannot submit."
Merely saying something is usurpation is not enough. Action is required.
5. It’s Not Just a Right—It’s a Duty
The Founders didn’t just argue that people can resist unconstitutional acts—they insisted that they must.
St. George Tucker made it clear:
"Acts of congress to be binding, must be made pursuant to the constitution; otherwise they are not laws, but a mere nullity; or what is worse, acts of usurpation. The people are not only not bound by them, but the several departments and officers of the governments, both federal and state, are bound by oath to oppose them."
James Madison reaffirmed this in the Virginia Resolutions of 1798:
"In case of a deliberate, palpable and dangerous exercise of other powers not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties there-to have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them."
No comments:
Post a Comment