Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
The conclusion of the U.S. Civil War in 1865 provided three major outcomes. The Union was again one, slavery was abolished and the Southern states were physically, economically, and morally devastated. The abolishment of slavery was a good result for the nation. The humanitarian element alone was reason enough to celebrate the demise of this brutal institution. In addition, the contributions of freed slaves and their ancestors to the building of the nation following their emancipation are well-documented and vast. Of course, the after-effects of the war for the South could not in any way be considered a positive result. Their money was no good and their homes, buildings, and infrastructure were demolished. It is estimated that one in four males of military age in the South either died or suffered crippling injuring during the war (“The Civil War”, n.d.). There is no credible argument regarding these two outcomes as to whether they were good or bad for the nation. Though rejoining the country is still today a celebrated event in U.S. history, it ultimately caused a negative outcome. The main reason that the Confederacy succeeded from the Union was the issue of States’ rights which are guaranteed by the Constitution but were almost completely lost following the Civil War.
In most instances, individual states have the primary legal authority to nullify any actions taken by the federal government as described in the U.S. Constitution. This includes many legal rights up to and including the right to succeed. The Founding Fathers drafted this concept into the Constitution. They knew all too well that a decentralized federal government is less likely to become tyrannical because the people are better able to hold it accountable. The Founders’ intent was not necessary to give the states additional powers but to limit the authority of the federal government and to alleviate the fear that it would exercise powers it was not given. This concept was understood by the Founders, the Confederacy, and many of both conservative and liberal ideologies since the earliest beginnings of the nation (Epstein, 2003).
Within Article I, Section Eight of the Constitution is a purposely restricted set of responsibilities allocated to the federal government. It prints the money, regulates commerce, and provides for the common defense, in other words, funds the military. The 1819 U.S. Supreme Court decided that the federal government also possessed certain ‘implied powers’ in the McCulloch v. Maryland case. These are powers that are not mentioned specifically by the Constitution but are essential to operate the government effectively. For example, it is implied that the government can establish a bank because of its responsibility to regulate commerce, collect taxes, and print money. It is also implied that states cannot assemble an army or print currency while some powers such as collecting taxes are shared by both entities (“Federalism”, n.d.). These implied powers of the federal government have been stretched ever further since the Civil War era.
The dilution of the Constitution and the loss of states’ rights was one of the unhappy consequences of the Civil War. If the states had retained their rights, businesses would be encouraged to locate in states that provided more economic freedoms than others thereby creating competition which would constantly act to stimulate the economy. Given this scenario, “State politicians (could) easily be held accountable for results that fail to measure up to other states” (Epstein, 2003). People would have the flexibility to move to a state that more closely reflects their ideals of society and culture. The freedoms envisioned by the Founding Fathers regarding states’ rights have been whittled away starting with the Civil War and have snowballed since, especially within the past six years.
Works Cited
“(The) Civil War and Emancipation: 1861-1865.” Africans in America Resource Bank. (n.d.). PBS Online. Web.
Epstein, Marcus. “Libertarians and States’ Rights.” (2003). Lew Rockwell. Web.
“Federalism.” Educational Outreach. (n.d.). U.S. Courts. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.