I’ve never understood the argument of states’ rights people. Their arguments have been the same since before the Civil War and they just make no sense to me. It all boils down to, it’s okay for the states to infringe upon your rights, but it’s not okay for the federal government to stop states from infringing on your rights. That’s how it’s always been, whether we’re talking about slavery, women’s suffrage, worker’s rights, civil rights, public education, abortion, gay rights, marriage equality, and now trans rights.
That’s like me saying your point of view boils down to saying it’s okay when the federal government infringes your rights but not the states.
I’m saying that neither is okay and if the federal government needs to step in in order to protect your rights, then I’m fine with that.
What it really boils down to is an acceptance of the federal system established by our Constitution and a belief that injustice can be cured on the state level.
I don’t think that’s the case. It’s a pretty selfish view of justice if you want to be state by state.
Oftentimes change only happens at the national level because states have the freedom and authority to make those changes. It builds a momentum that wouldn’t exist if the federal government held all the cards.
That’s not the case in any of the examples that I listed.