ey are friendly to the existence of the States; that
they are the friends of federative, but the enemies of a
consolidated general government, and yet, sir, to accomplish a
paltry object, they are willing to settle a principle which, beyond
all doubt, would eventually plant a consolidated government, with
unlimited power, upon the ruins of the State governments.

Nothing can be more absurd than to contend that there is a practical
restraint upon a political body, who are answerable to none but
themselves for the violation of the restraint, and who can derive,
from the very act of violation, undeniable justification of their
conduct.

If, Mr. Chairman, you mean to have a constitution, you must discover
a power to which the acknowledged right is attached of pronouncing
the invalidity of the acts of the legislature, which contravened the
instrument.

Does the power reside in the States? Has the legislature of a State
a right to declare an act of Congress void? This would be erring
upon the opposite extreme. It would be placing the general
government at the feet of the State governments. It would be
allowing one member of the Union to control all the rest. It would
inevitably lead to civil dissension and a dissolution of the general
government. Will it be pretended that the State courts have the
exclusive right of deciding upon the validity of our laws?

I admit they have the right to declare an act of Congress void. But
this right they enjoy in practice, and it ever essentially must
exist, subject to the revision and control of the courts of the
United States. If the State courts definitely possessed the right
of declaring the invalidity of the laws of this government, it would
bring us in subjection to the States. The judges of those courts,
being bound by the laws of the State, if a State declared an act of
Congress unconstitutional, the law of the State would oblige its
courts to determine the law invalid. This principle would also
destroy the uniformity of obligation upon all the States, which
should attend every law of this government. If a law were declared
void in one State, it would exempt the citizens of that State from
its operation, whilst obedience was yielded to it in the other
States. I go further, and say, if the States or State courts had a
final power of annulling the acts of this government, its miserable
and precarious existence would not be worth the trouble of a moment
to preserve. I