Kontraktualizm versus federalizm. Argument konstytucyjnoprawny Johna Caldwella Calhouna w okresie kryzysu nullifikacyjnego
Contractarianism versus federalism.John C. Calhoun’s constitutional arguments during Nullification Crisis

Summary/Abstract: Author presents main constitutional arguments for states’ rights formulated by John Caldwell Calhoun – American politician and political theorist – during the Nullification Crisis, which involved a confrontation between South Carolina and the federal government. The crisis ensued after South Carolina declared that the federal Tariffs of 1828 and 1832 (Tariff of Abominations) were unconstitutional and therefore null and void within the sovereign boundaries of the state. For the Author J.C. Calhoun rejecting the centralization philosophy of Supreme Court and presidential administration proposed the theory of nullification based on Jefferson’s and Madison’s arguments included in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798. The Author argues, that J.C. Calhoun’s political and law philosophy represents of the South Atlantic tradition of agrarian republicanism relied on a decentralized moral and religious order based on the idea of subsidiarity and Unites States as the Union of sovereign and free states.

• Details
• Contents