Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 6, June 1956
File 037
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Facts Forum. Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 6, June 1956 - File 037. 1956-06. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. January 27, 2020. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/139/show/106.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum. (1956-06). Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 6, June 1956 - File 037. Facts Forum News, 1955-1956. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/139/show/106

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum, Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 6, June 1956 - File 037, 1956-06, Facts Forum News, 1955-1956, University of Houston Libraries, accessed January 27, 2020, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/139/show/106.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 6, June 1956
Series Title Facts Forum News
Creator
  • Facts Forum
Publisher Facts Forum
Date June 1956
Language eng
Subject
  • Anti-communist movements
  • Conservatism
  • Politics and government
  • Hunt, H. L.
Place
  • Dallas, Texas
Genre
  • journals (periodicals)
Type
  • Text
Identifier AP2.F146 v. 5 1956; OCLC: 1352973
Collection
  • University of Houston Libraries
  • Facts Forum News
Rights No Copyright - United States: This item is in the public domain in the United States and may be used freely in the United States. The item may not be in the public domain under the copyright laws of other countries.
Item Description
Title File 037
Transcript The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, shall not he construed to deny or dispeereege others retained hy the People. The states' rights theory in turn is based on an interpretation of state sovereignty, and therein rages part of fte important legal fight now in progress. Just what is the extent of state sovereignty? Did the states hand over "leir individual sovereignty in order to form "a more perfect union" at the *doption of the Constitution? Representative John Bell Williams (D-Miss.), in a speech before tlie U. S, House of Representatives,"' attempts to recreate the motive's and spirit leading to the adoption of the Constitution atld the forming of the Union: "The time was 1787; the place, Phil- 'delphia. . . In attendance were lov- ers of liberty who held made extreme sacrifices ancl endured extraordinary •'''relships in their common resistance :" tyranny. . . The high price paid "r their liberty was fresh in the minds ■•the assembled patriots. In that convention each colony vol- "'hinh surrendered to the Union cer tain powers which they regarded as necessary to the purposes and functions of the central government. . . . "In spite of the cautious wording of the original document, the states refused to ratify the Constitution until ample assurance was given to the states ancl the people that the central government so created could never devour its creators, or deprive the people of their 'inalienable' rights. As a result, the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments, were added to the Constitution. "These ten amendments did not expand the authority of the central government. On the contrary, they further restricted its authority. Like the Ten Commandments, our Bill of Rights are 'Thou Shalt Nots,' directed to the federal government. They shield the people and the states from an oppressive anel tyrannical government born of over-concentration of powers. They were, anel are now, the basis for individual liberty and state sover- eignty." In an interesting series of articles published in the Dallas Morning News, Robert M. Randolph of Texas Christian University and Dr. Lloyd M. Wells eif Southern Methodist University debate the legal basis for interposition, dealing principally with the interpretation of state sox'ereignty ancl the question of judicial review. Mr. Randolph xvrites, "Was the ratification of the Constitution the act of a single sovereign, the people from New Hampshire to Georgia, or was it the act of thirteen sovereigns? In the Constitutional Convention, the states were equal and had but one vote each. The Constitution was ratified by thirteen conventions, each drawing from the sovereign, the people of a separate state. Ratification by such a convention bound only that state, not the xvhole binding the parts. A state which refused to ratify would be a foreign power to those that did. Thus the Constitution is a compact between sovereigns. "Did the ratification change the seat of sovereignty from the people of the several states to the people of the Union as a whole?" continues Mr. Randolph. "One or the other must possess it, as sovereignty may not be divided, though sovereign powers, the exercise of sovereignty, may be both delegated and limited by the sover- CONSTITUTIONAL WAY TO BALANCE THE SCALES? fs . ing
File Name uhlib_1352973_v005_n006_037.jpg