When did the States lose their Sovereignty?

Greywolf

First Sergeant
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Another founding father
George Clinton, "In Opposition to Destruction of States' Rights"

The... premises on which the new form of government is erected, declares a consolidation or union of all thirteen parts, or states, into one great whole, under the firm of the United States... But whoever seriously considers the immense extent of territory comprehended within the limits of the United States, together with the variety of its climates, productions, and commerce, the difference of extent, and number of inhabitants in all; the dissimilitude of interests, morals, and politics in almost every one, will receive it as an intuitive truth, that a consolidated republican form of government therein, can
never form a perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to you and your posterity
http://www.pinzler.com/ushistory/argantfedsupp.html
 

BigTex

Corporal
Joined
May 19, 2019
@BigTex ,

What a thoughtful and reasonable approach to getting answers to your questions! Further study and research can only add to your knowledge and assist you in finding the answers you seek.

Good luck and I will expect your return.

Until our next post,
Unionblue
Having just finished reading Secretary Upshurs essay, I admit to agreement with his assertions probably as a result of the education I received from the public school system curriculum in use at the time in Texas. Reading it, I felt as tho I had returned to my youth and was sitting in class hearing the teacher.
I shall continue to explore the material you have provided in order to satisfy my mind as to the correctness of my beliefs.
Again, I thank you for your assistance.
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
Having just finished reading Secretary Upshurs essay, I admit to agreement with his assertions probably as a result of the education I received from the public school system curriculum in use at the time in Texas. Reading it, I felt as tho I had returned to my youth and was sitting in class hearing the teacher.
I shall continue to explore the material you have provided in order to satisfy my mind as to the correctness of my beliefs.
Again, I thank you for your assistance.

@BigTex ,

I am honored at the attention you are giving to the material I have presented here on this thread and appreciated the courage and fortitude it takes to give such attention.

I hope that I can return the favor with equal attention.

Sincerely,
Unionblue
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).

piratehunter

Private
Joined
Mar 10, 2018
cw1865,

From some of the articles I have researched on the subject, it appears plain to me that state sovereignty was always in flux or change.

The states never seemed to have full nationhood status at any time in their history, but the closest they came was under the Articles of Confederation.

But after that, I do not understand how anyone could concieve that the states had retained complete sovereignty when it came to the Constitution and secession in 1860.

To me, it seems there had to be an almost willful suspension of belief and of historical fact to claim the Constitution was based on state sovereignty vs. the people.

Unionblue
My US History instructor taught us that before the war the expression generally used was "These United States" and after the war it morphed into "The United States". He called the 1861 - 1865 time period as "The War Against the States."

He was very objective about History and absolutely refused to "take sides" in the whole Pro North anti South / Pro South anti North foolishness that we constantly see on CivilWarTalk. What a great History instructor!
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
My US History instructor taught us that before the war the expression generally used was "These United States" and after the war it morphed into "The United States". He called the 1861 - 1865 time period as "The War Against the States."

He was very objective about History and absolutely refused to "take sides" in the whole Pro North anti South / Pro South anti North foolishness that we constantly see on CivilWarTalk. What a great History instructor!

A wise man, indeed!
 

WJC

Major General
Judge Adv. Genl.
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
My US History instructor taught us that before the war the expression generally used was "These United States" and after the war it morphed into "The United States". He called the 1861 - 1865 time period as "The War Against the States."
A common misconception. Both terms were used extensively in the antebellum. The term "the United States" has always been far more used then "these United States".
 

BigTex

Corporal
Joined
May 19, 2019
@BigTex ,

Just thought you, and others who are following this thread, might be interested in another, old, thread on the same topic.

Legal discussion of state sovereignty and powers.

https://civilwartalk.com/threads/legal-discussion-of-state-sovereignty-and-powers.143576/

Might be worth yours and everyone else's while to see the arguments, pro and con, made 'way back when.'

Sincerely,
Unionblue
Have read the entire thread, except the edits.
Some conclusions :
Mr. Madison seems contradictory of his own views.
The OP beats his head against a wall.
The opposing side rejects every argument in support of State sovereignty = "nation-state".
Status quo of consolidation and nationalism reigns supreme, argument to the contrary notwithstanding.
 

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
I have often ask this question because there are those that say there was no such thing. What do y'all think?

State Sovereignty, as used and understood, in the ante-bellum South, was lost when all the states of the Union, amalgamated their sovereignties, under the Constitution; ask any anti-fedrealist at the time of the Congitutional debates in the states, at the time of its adoption, i.e., state sovereignty must survive Constitutional scrutiny.

Edited.
 

wausaubob

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Location
Denver, CO
There was a good deal of sovereignty and home rule, by necessity, in 1787. By 1820 the US government adopted a compromise restricting the spread of slavery. By 1844 it settled matters with Britain to a reasonable degree of certainty. By 1846 it fought and international empire building war. So between 1820 and 1846 there was the rapid assertion of US sovereignty. And the slave holders never complained because they controlled the US government and the local banks.
Three things were about to happen to legally and physically end local sovereignty. Electrical communication was established over most of the country. Travel times, especially in the north, were being rapidly reduced. The need for a national currency of uniform value was apparent. Those three things were going to end state sovereignty.
A national military institute, and a national navy were also going to strongly limit local sovereignty. When naval officers sail around the world as US representatives, that creates a strong national element in which the federal government is dominant.
 

BigTex

Corporal
Joined
May 19, 2019
When did the States lose their Sovereignty?
As soon as they ceased being States. I'm not sure what they are now. Maybe overly large counties?
 
Top