This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 25th, 2008 and is filed under Law. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
In the traditional sense, yes. These days, federalism is generally regarded as being those who wish to restore a balance between the division between what is federal, and what is local, that is more aligned with the original constitutional understanding.
I’m not sure it’s inappropriate either. Few federalists really argue for a weak federal government, just one that is more limited to its enumerated powers than is currently the case. Even the federalists of old would have hardly argued that the constitution should be construed as to allow the federal government carte blanch control of pretty much any commercial activity.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Wouldn’t that be a win for anti-federalism? And perhaps even anti-internationalism?
March 26th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
In the traditional sense, yes. These days, federalism is generally regarded as being those who wish to restore a balance between the division between what is federal, and what is local, that is more aligned with the original constitutional understanding.
I’m not sure it’s inappropriate either. Few federalists really argue for a weak federal government, just one that is more limited to its enumerated powers than is currently the case. Even the federalists of old would have hardly argued that the constitution should be construed as to allow the federal government carte blanch control of pretty much any commercial activity.