Which part of the country supported state's rights?

Answer 1

What schools seem to teach these days is that "state's rights" was a purely southern concept and important only in the latitude it allowed for slavery. The fact is that "states rights" was THE LAW OF THE LAND. After the Revolution the colonies had won their independence and what existed in America was not ONE nation, but thirteen little independent nations, which had loosely cooperated to beat the British. After a few years it became evident that a central government with a bit more power than that allowed by the Articles of Confederation would be a good thing. The thirteen little independent nations sent delegates to the Constitutional Convention where they agreed to give up ONLY PART of their sovereignty as independent states to the new Federal government. All governmental authority was in the states, and, again, they wished to cede ONLY PART of this to the new national government. Everyone understood this at the time but many states still would not ratify the new proposed Constitution until it was explicitly spelled out in the Constitution. So, the 10th Amendment to the Unites States Constitution was included in the original Bill of Rights. The amendment says:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The powers which WERE delegated to the United States (the Federal Government) were delegated BY the states. When the Constitution was drafted what the framers who wrote it had in mind was a central government of LIMITED POWERS. The states had all governmental power, and if they wished to surrender only a limited, specific amount of that power to the new central government, they were certainly entitled to do that, and that is in fact what they did. They were replacing the Articles of Confederation, which had allowed for a central government so weak as to be ineffective. They wished to strengthen the Federal Government some, but retain most governmental power at the state level.

The 10th Amendment is part of the original Bill of Rights. The proponents of the new Constitution had a hard job convincing people to support the new Constitution, and several states would not even consider ratifying the new Constitution until the Bill of Rights was attached to it. Thus this language was part of the Constitution from the start.

"State's rights" was, in fact, the law of the land from the beginning. The Federal Government had only limited, specific functions. All other governmental power remained with the states.

The sad thing is, its STILL the law of the land. The 10th Amendment has never been repealed - its still right there in the Bill of Rights of which we are so proud. It just means absolutely nothing today. It was effectively nullified by the Civil War, without the agreement of the people. This is one result of the Civil War - though the nation started with a central government of limited powers, and people had to be persuaded to even agree to those limited powers, the Civil War, among other things, was a massive power shift from the state capitals to Washington. Governments LIKE power, so don't expect Washington DC to ever give back the primacy it obtained at gunpoint in the Civil War. What you can expect to see instead is continued growth of the Federal Government, and continued encroachment into every facet of the lives of every citizen of every state. This has been the long term trend since the Civil War ended. Its some of the worst hypocrisy of American life that we continue to revere the Bill of Rights but nobody ever wants to mention little facts like these. You're supposed to believe the war was about nothing but slavery and evil southerners and you're not supposed to notice that somehow in there, we went from having a central government of limited powers to the monolithic colossus poking its nose into everything and everybody's business we have today, which is something that nobody agreed to, and which seldom serves the interests of the average person.

Answer 2

they differd because south still wanted slaves so that it would keep there business and south didn't want to have slaves any more.they made a comprimise and siad that northern states had till 1808 to get more slaves after that they could not import more slaves.

Answer 3

The issue of States Rights is a broad one and all state governments in the US recognize the limits of the Federal government as stated in the US Constitution. Disagreements on this issue in today's world take place in the US courts of law. In 1860, however, the US was not yet even 100 years old and the number of amendments since the Bill of Rights, within the Constitution were only two. Slave holding states in the South in 1860, believed that Northern abolitionists had gained control of the executive branch under President Lincoln and the line separating the role of the Federal government and the political rights of the states were going to begin to erode. The elven states that formed the Confederacy clearly believed that the expanding number of Northern states would marginalize the Southern states, and this was a problem for them.

Answer 4

No, so that if Supreme Court made a new law about ending slavery, Southern states wouldn't ignore it

Answer 5

The South (the Confederate States) supported states' rights.

Answer 6

The South favored states rights.

Answer 7

John C. Calhoun

Answer 8

i dont know you wont answer my question

Answer 9

boiiiiiissss