Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I suppose, technically, a state could legalize slavery, but I don't think any state would actually do that.
There's something missing (at least a word or two, apparently) from the second paragraph of your OP, so I'm not sure the scenario is really clear. I'm not sure what the sentence "It would be amended to state that its statues only apply to laws the federal government, and..." means. Laws the federal government... what?
Are you saying the Constitution is completely voided? In that case, yes - slavery could be legalized on a state-by-state basis, but then you've just dissolved the United States of America. But as long as the Constitution as written applies, no - states could not do that, because the Constitution supersedes state law in the protection of civil rights.
Still just not exactly sure what the terms are here...
The only way that this would work would be if people would continue to have absolute freedom to move from any state to any other state, whenever they wanted. So yeah, Mississippi could re-legalize slavery if they wanted, but the slaves would still have the freedom to move away. (Which, de facto, means that slavery would not legally exist.)
I would also say that travelers from other states who unwittingly broke another state's law (such as, let's say, drinking alcohol on Sunday in Utah) wouldn't be punished according to that state's law, but instead would be first given a warning, and the opportunity to leave the state within a specified amount of time (maybe 24 hours) without any penalty. This wouldn't apply to a certain set of laws that would need to be maintained across the entire country, such as those against murder, rape, and major crimes like that.
Here's something I've sometimes thought might be an interesting idea.
Let's say they amended the constitution so that, essentially, states could do just about anything they wanted. It would be amended to state that its statues only apply to laws the federal government, and states are free to do basically anything they wanted.
So, for example, Utah could turn itself into an official Mormon state, with just about everything closed on Sunday, favoritism to people who are members of the LDS church, and so on.
Massachusetts or California could turn itself into a social democracy or even socialist state, ban all guns, enact a one-payer universal health system, ban religion, or whatever else they wanted.
Oklahoma could turn itself into an official state of the Southern Baptist Church (similar to what Utah would do for LDS members), have absolutely no restrictions on gun ownership whatsoever, they could ban the speaking of any language except English in public, and so on.
Wisconsin could make German its official language if they wanted, and subsidize the price of beer.
Do you think this would be a good idea? Or would it create too much chaos and be un-workable? I could imagine that, in some cases at least, enforcement of people going across state borders would be problematic, though undoubtedly some provisions would be made for people just passing through or visiting. On the other hand, it would create some "extreme competition" and really let people live in the kind of political environment they'd be most happy in.
What do you think?
I don't know about the other states you mentioned, but Utah has always pretty much done the things you suggest. I don't think they need anymore encouragement.
You are suggesting that the US turn itself into 50 small countries. And we think things are bad now.
Last edited by Colorado Rambler; 02-05-2019 at 05:39 PM..
Actually, the States already have nearly that much power, IF they decide to use it.
Nearly every state has laws regarding who makes up the Militia.
Every state has a Constitution that in most ways mirrors the U.S. Constitution. Some states have a constitutional provision to rescind the Compact that exists with the United States, if the Citizens so desire. They can also rescind the Vehicle Reciprocity Compact.
Every state has the right to amend their Constitution if they so desire. They CAN establish an official language. Any state can have a statute that makes a statue of anybody perfectly legal, even if it offends some dingbat. Basically, the statute would say "Don't like the statue? Don't look at it, and stay away from it!"
The states can exceed the provisions of Federal laws, just as California does in many ways; vehicle laws, firearms laws, etc.
Two thirds of the states can demand a Constitutional Convention to amend the United States Constitution. See Article V of the U.S. Constitution.
The States and The People have a lot of power, IF they would use it!
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't understand why you would consider this to be a good idea.
In general, I don't see any point to state laws or regulations in the first place. For instance, if a good stance or method exists, I don't see why everyone shouldn't be obliged to follow it. If it is ultimately decided that guns are bad, then they're bad everywhere. If there is a "best" solution for divorce law, pesticide regulation, or anything else, I don't see why states should be allowed to choose a worse solution.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
