answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

the national government's powers should be interpreted narrowly.

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: A proponent of states' rights would argue that?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Related questions

Why do people have a responibility to respect the rights of others?

Some would argue that people have a moral responsibility to respect the rights of others. It would also be difficult to have a healthy and well-functioning society if people did not respect the rights of others.


What impact did gunpowder have in the US?

Gunpowder had been invented long before the United States existed, so it has always been part of the American experience. A better question would be the impact of guns in the United States and the answer varies depending on who you ask. There are those who believe that the second amendment means that any sort of gun/weapon is protected by the Bill of Rights. While there are those who will argue that guns like an AK47 or missiles should not be covered by the Bill of Rights. They argue that there is no purpose to owning weapons of this sort.


What reasons do the Southern States have politically that would cause them to fight the North?

For states rights


Do you favor or oppose an amendment to the US Constitution that would ban same-sex marriage in all states?

I would oppose such an amendment as a violation of states' rights as well as the civil rights of Americans.


What changes did the states want before they would approve the Constitution?

Protection for citizens' rights(APEX)


What rights are citizens entitled to if they move or visit another state?

You would only lose the rights you had in what ever states.


How might Abraham Lincolns victory in the election of 1860 lead to future problems?

Many people in the north wanted no part of slavery anywhere in the country. Southerners wanted slavery because they thought it helped production of crops etc. There are contrasting beliefs. Abraham Lincoln was from the North and a proponent of Federal rights and powers to limit slavery. The southern states wanted strong state powers and rights and weaker federal powers and rights. Slavery was a States Right issue and the federal government should not interfere. The northern states wanted the exact opposite, strong federal powers and rights and weaker state powers and rights. The right of the Federal government to abolish Slavery should trump any so-called States Rights. So the southern states voted to secede from or leave the United States also know as the Union. The US Civil War was thus started.


Is population an asset?

Malthus would argue no. Henry George would argue yes.


What political rights and freedoms a person would have in Taiwan?

as much as people in the states have


What serious problem in the US led to the Civil War?

there are many different answers to this question. most would argue that it is the problem with slavery at the time. true southerners would say it had more to do with rights of independent states. most southerners were so poor they could not afford slaves. after a while, states started seceding from the union, and opened fire on fort sumter, thus starting the civil war


If mother signs off rights and father has custody gets married wife adopts the child would grandparents have rights to see child?

Some states may allow for it, but with that specific set of circumstances, the answer would be no in Texas (and I would imagine most states).


What was needed before the last few states would support the Constitution?

A bill of rights