Liability
Locked Account.
I swear people think they can just type freedom and liberty and constitution instead of making an actually sound argument. Shouting those words dont make you a patriot and therefore better than anyone else...even though you seem to want to delude yourself into thinking so.
W
T
F
States aren't the final arbiter of constitutionality by ANY stretch of the imagination. States have Attorney Generals who offer opinions on legal topics in addition to upholding state constitutions. States also have their own supreme courts. If a state has an opinion, a justiciable case or controversy has to arise...then it moves up the judicial track. Eventually it jumps from state-level courts to federal-level courts and of course, as I hope we all know to the Supreme Court. That's how American law is determined. States don't just decide..."hey! I dont want to pay that, I'm not going to!"
What's amazing is what I typed should be known by your average high-school student.
In your highly informed opinion, then, if the Federal Government transgresses the very limits imposed on it BY the States ["imposed" when the States ratified the Constitution (the one that brought the Federal Government into existence) in the first place] and the States are aggrieved by the Federal Government's invalid usurpations, then the States can only "do" something about it by bringing a law suit. But, if a State's own Court agrees that the Feds have violated the limitations imposed on it by the Constitution, that determination is subject to a Federal review process. So, the Federal Government (again, in your highly informed opinion) is properly the only party to determine whether or not it has violated the rules imposed on it? Their objectivity is no way in doubt under such circumstances?
The whole notion of contract law appears to have eluded you.
Let's recap it. Let's say: You enter into a contract with a wholesaler to provide you with certain items for your business, but you stipulate in the contract, as a TERM of that contract, that this wholesale supplier shall be prohibited from competing against you in your geographic area. You honor your commitment and your end of the contract by paying the supplier and buying the product from him. The wholesaler honors part of the contract by supplying the product to you at the agreed-upon price, but you discover that he is also operating a competing business in your geographic area in an intentional violation of the terms of your contract.
Are you prohibited from voiding the contract with the supplier? HE breached it, but you are bound by it anyway?
Are you required to take the dispute to Court -- but you have to permit the supplier to BE the Court and the Court of last resort?
Of course not.
That which you entered into voluntarily upon specific terms and conditions may be withdrawn from if the other side doesn't honor the contractual terms.
Why on Earth would the States insist that ratification would come only upon certain precise restrictions but NOT have the right and the ability to withdraw from the Agreement if the Federal Government willfully violates those very terms?