04-28-2016, 12:13 PM
I am a defender of states' rights, and much of my reasoning for this is based on the Founding Fathers' view that the federal government should be rigorously limited to the powers defined and described in the Constitution, and that other matters, which the Constitution did not address, were to be left up to the states.
However, there are two areas which have "stumped" me.
1. My state of NJ has a constitution which does not mention the right of its citizens to bear arms (unlike 40+ of the other 50 states which actually do). This makes it very difficult (among other reasons, such as corrupt police precincts who add requirements on top of state law-mandated requirements) to even purchase a handgun. A CCW permit is essentially impossible to obtain.
However, if each state has a right to define its own laws, then how can NJ residents fight back? How do we use the Constitution vs. the constitution of NJ?
2. A liberal/leftist friend of mine says that "states' rights" have been used by many politicians to preserve structures, to enact laws, and to perpetuate practices which were discriminatory: school segregation, racial segregation, no voting for nonwhites, etc. I myself learned that certain states from the former Confederacy later passed specific laws that only "free white men" would have the right to bear arms.