About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

64 Clev. St. L. Rev. Et Cetera 1 (2016)

handle is hein.journals/cvdstlw64 and id is 1 raw text is: CLEVELAND STATE LAW REVIEW ET CETERA VOLUME 64 JANUARY 26, 2016 PAGES 1-13 HOW THE TENTH AMENDMENT SAVED THE CONSTITUTION, CONTRADICTS THE MODERN VIEW OF BROAD FEDERAL POWER, AND IMPOSES STRICT LIMITATIONS STEVEN T. VOIGT This paper challenges the position that the Tenth Amendment merely states an abstract concept and has no place in constitutional interpretation. The history of the Tenth Amendment portrays a much greater significance for this amendment. Not only did the Tenth Amendment likely save the Constitution and preserve the union, but it imposed very real restraints on federal power. The implication for modern courts is that the Tenth Amendment cannot be ignored. Far from just stating a truism, it sets forth a constitutional rule of interpretation that must be applied whenever the scope of any federal power is examined.1 I. Introduction On the Fourth of July in 1788, as delegates met in Philadelphia and debated the terms of a federal constitution, a group of Pennsylvanians gathered in the town of Carlisle to celebrate the anniversary of America's independence. After a speech delivered by a pastor marking the occasion, members of the crowd raised their tankards to thirteen toasts, one for each of the former American colonies. Following each toast, muskets fired into the air, accentuating the significance of the proclamations. After twelve toasts had been made, cups were raised for the final toast: May America remain forever free from tyranny, anarchy, and consolidation.2 Musket fire raked into the sky. Steve Voigt is a Senior Assistant Attorney General for a State Attorney General's Office, where he serves as lead counsel on complex and often high profile constitutional litigation. Prior to joining the Attorney General's office, Mr. Voigt was Of Counsel with a leading global law firm. Before private practice, Mr. Voigt served a one-year term as a Judicial Clerk for the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Mr. Voigt has authored a number of published law review and journal articles about constitutional law and other legal topics. The views expressed in this paper are exclusively those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the author's current employer or any former employer or the forum where this is published. 2 Carlisle Gazette (July 9, 1788), reprinted in THE DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FIRST FEDERAL ELECTIONS, 1788-1790, VOL. I., 242-43 (Merrill Jensen & Robert A. Becker eds.,1976).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most