South Carolina's basic argument for nullification was that states had the right to declare federal laws unconstitutional and therefore null and void within their borders, as outlined in Thomas Jefferson and James Madison's Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. They believed that the Constitution was a compact among the states and that states had the ultimate authority to determine the constitutionality of federal laws.
Yes, an argument can have multiple conclusions if there are multiple points or perspectives being considered that lead to different outcomes or resolutions.
The major argument was the absence of a bill of rights in the Constitution
I believe one argument he made was that there are no provisions for cessation in the Constitution. One problem with the argument is that according to the Constitution any powers not given to the federal government are reserved to the states.
That the Constitution had no bill of rights.
yes, true
it did not guarantee basic rights
it did not guarantee basic rights
tyler swift:)
they didn't get to practice the Bill of Rights
they didn't get to practice the Bill of Rights
The opposite of a thesis is an antithesis, which presents a contrasting viewpoint or argument to the original thesis. It is often used in dialectical reasoning to challenge or counter the main argument.