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

4 Regent J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 77 (2012)
Between Law and Conscience: Jones v. Van Zandt and the Constitutional Obligation of Obedience

handle is hein.journals/rejoupp4 and id is 83 raw text is: BETWEEN LAW AND CONSCIENCE: Jones v. Van Zandt AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATION OF OBEDIENCE MICHAEL J.C. TAYLOR* Article VI of the U.S. Constitution states categorically that the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursu- ance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the su- preme Law of the Land.' In congruence with this clause, several decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court have reaffirmed the sovereignty of the federal government in cases involving issues ranging from state sovereignty to personal actions. Yet, the Court's decision in Jones v. Van Zandt was unique in its assertion that a citizen under the authority of the Consti- tution was bound to uphold it even if it interfered with his moral code.2 Though the decision was made in a case involv- ing a runaway slave and an abolitionist, the obligation of obedience transcended its original context and has been ap- plied in a myriad of constitutional issues ever since. It was not until the 1950s when the Court, under the leadership of Chief Justice Earl Warren, began reappraising the jurispru- dence of the Jones decision and, thus, redefining federal sovereignty in a manner that took into consideration issues of personal conscience.3 * Michael J.C. Taylor, a Los Angeles native, earned his Ph.D. from the Univer- sity of Missouri Kansas City in 2001, under the mentorship of Herman M. Hattaway, a notable scholar of the American Civil War. Mr. Taylor has received several teach- ing awards, including one from the Department of Education's TRIO program and a listing in Who's Who among America's Teachers. He is currently working on a pro- ject involving the conssstitutionall intellectual re-examination of Scott v. Sandford (1857) entitled, A Bondage in Liberty: the Taney Court and the Constitutional Protec- tion of Human Chattel Slavery. 1. U.S. CONsT. art. VI. 2. 46 U.S. (5 How.) 215, 223-25 (1847). 3. Editors, Calif L. Rev., Foreward, 58 CALIF. L. REV. 1, 2 (1970). 77

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