The Kentucky Resolution and the South Carolina Exposition and Protest.

Introduction

The Kentucky resolutions were political statements and the arguments were that the national government put together states and any exercise from unassigned powers was not valid. According to Dow (1), the state had the right to decide when their authority had been violated and decide on the way they should be corrected. The resolutions also declared that the state powers should determine the effectiveness of the federal law. According to Calhoun (1), the South Carolina Exposition and Protest was a document written to object the tariff of abominations. This tariff stated that if it was not revoked, South Carolina would retreat. It also expressed the doctrine of nullification which is the idea that a state has a right to dismiss federal law. The national government can rightfully exercise only the powers that it is given, the ones that are mandatory and proper to perform them effectively. The others are reserved for the states and the people. Those who claim to exercise authority under the constitution should show that it is granted or that it is necessary.

Dow (1) states that the Kentucky resolutions were protests against the restrictions on civil freedom found in the Alien and Sedition Acts rather than what was expressed in the constitution. The resolutions criticized the Alien and sedition Acts to be unconstitutional and this was because the acts violated the federal authority. They stated that the federal government had no mandate to exercise powers that were not specifically assigned to it in the constitution. They protected the constitution’s civil freedom more so the freedom of speech and that of the press. The resolutions were written to respond to the Alien and sedition Acts. The Alien Acts gave the president the power to detain and deport any non-citizen he considered dangerous in the United States even if their country was at war. The suspected aliens had no right to any legal hearing or the charges against them.

 According to Dow (1), in the sedition Act, it was a crime talk, write, or publish anything that was not true, anything that was hostile or scandalous against the U.S government, President or Congress. Many people were prosecuted by the sedition act which targeted the newspaper editors who were in favor of the Democratic-Republican Party. The resolution was written to protect the freedom of the press to be able to work and publish freely. The resolution declared the Acts null and void because they were not constitutional.

Dow (1) states that the resolutions were intended to convince other state congresses to pass the same resolutions which did not succeed because most of them argued that the federal courts were the legal interpreters of the federal constitution. The language and tone of the resolutions are constitutional agreements that were developed to elaborate on the necessary structures of the government. They are perceived as the early occurrences of party politics in the United States and also an aim to obtain an electoral advantage. Though the rest of the states declined the resolutions, the measure acted as political promotion, uniting the Democratic-Republican Party.

The South Carolina exposition and protest was a document that was written to protest against the act of abomination according to Calhoun (1). The tariff was argued to be unconstitutional because it favored manufacturing over agriculture and commerce. The power of the tariff was to generate income and not to protect the American industries from foreign competition. The tariff violated the constitution and was said to be oppressive, unequal and destroyed the freedom of the country. It made the southern the slaves of manufacturing and imposed a protective tax on agriculturalists to benefit the Northern people who owned factories. This oppressed people and made the rich richer and the poor poorer. The economic disagreements between the industrial North and the agricultural south could not be avoided. The tariff placed high taxes on foreign manufactured goods which were a disadvantage for the south because it was agricultural and had to import most of its products. The south exported its products and the tariff would make other countries increase their taxes as well. The tariff was beneficial to the North because the industries were more developed and therefore brought more money.

 According to Cox (1), the South Carolina Exposition and Protest were written to bring change to the weakness in the system and reinforced the principle of nullification which is the right of a state to ignore, nullify any federal law that is not in line with the constitution. Some community interests can be handled fairly by focusing on the will and the power of several states in the government and this reduces a lot of conflicts. The states have different concerns and interests which cannot be managed by the general authority without injustice and oppression and therefore they should be a division in the exercise of powers. This would enable the states to give their views regarding their areas of concern. It was written to oppose unauthorized taxation from the people.

According to Dow (1), the Kentucky resolutions in the U.S history were passed to oppose the Alien and Sedition Acts and were drafted by federalists. The Republicans responded in the Kentucky Resolutions which were embraced by the Kentucky congress in November 1798. They attacked the Federalists on the constitution and how they could increase the power of the national government to the states. Another resolution was adopted in February 1799 which allowed the states to implement their decisions and nullification of laws that were not agreed upon.

According to Calhoun (1), South Carolina’s Exposition and Protest was a document that was written during the nullification crises. The document was meant to protest against the Tariff of Abomination which was passed to protect the industry in the Northern United States. The nullification doctrine which stated the idea of a state having the right to object federal law was adopted by congress, making the tariff null and void.

The two documents were written to protest on states having the authority to decide when the federal government had surpassed their powers. Both the Tariff of abomination and the Alien and Sedition Acts were perceived to be unconstitutional, oppressive and denied people the rights to their freedom. The two documents include the doctrine of nullification which failed to pass because other state congress did not pass the protests. The writers of both documents concealed their authorship because they were part of the government by the time they were writing them. According to Dow (1), both documents spoke about the freedom of the people. The documents talked about delegation of powers and that the states would be the judges of the constitution.

According to Dow (1), the Kentucky resolution was written in response to the Alien and Sedition acts because they argued that the Acts illegally took the powers that were set aside for the states. The South Carolina Exposition and Protests were written to protest against the Tariff of Abomination. The argument of this was that the dangers of the Alien acts could not be compared to the problems experienced with the Tariff. The Alien Acts in the Kentucky resolutions were Acts that violated the constitution by granting the president the power to detain and deport non-citizens with no considerations and deny the press their freedom of speech and publishing. The other document spoke of the violation of the constitution by favoring the manufacturing industries over agriculture and commerce.

Conclusion

States should have the ability to nullify a national law if it is not constitutional. If the state believes that powers of a certain law have not been properly used, or they are oppressive they should be nullified. If the laws do not include the major topics for example laws regarding citizenship and health regulations or maybe the laws put are not satisfying to the people, the state should nullify them. States should have the ability to nullify a law if the federal government oversteps the powers granted to it by the constitution. State nullification should be used when the activities of the federal government go overboard in its performance according to the constitution. If high taxation is introduced and it is not according to the constitution, the state should have the ability to nullify the law.