Thursday, February 8, 2024

Sovereignty at Stake: Protecting Individual Liberties and State Rights

Sovereignty at Stake: Protecting Individual Liberties and State Rights

Cynthia F. Hodges, JD, LLM, MA


The concept of individual liberty and the right to self-governance are not just basic principles; they are foundational pillars deeply ingrained in the United States' founding documents. These principles assert that in the face of tyranny or oppression, people have an inherent right to resist and even overthrow their government if necessary. Moreover, states retain the right to secede from the union when their fundamental liberties are threatened. At the core of this ethos lies the principle of popular sovereignty, enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, which dictates that the legitimacy of government derives from the consent of the governed. This principle empowers citizens to resist tyranny and assert their rights in the face of oppression.

As articulated in the Declaration of Independence, when a government fails to protect the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, it forfeits its legitimacy. In such circumstances, it becomes not only the right but the duty of the people to alter or abolish that government and institute a new one that better serves their interests and preserves their freedoms. This concept of popular sovereignty places ultimate authority in the hands of the people, rejecting the notion of absolute authority and reaffirming the fundamental equality and dignity of all citizens.

Throughout American history, the principle of popular sovereignty has served as a rallying cry for movements seeking to challenge oppressive regimes and assert the rights of the people. From the fight for independence against British colonial rule to the civil rights movement of the 20th century, Americans have invoked this principle to demand justice, equality, and freedom. It underscores the dynamic nature of government and the need for constant vigilance to ensure that it remains true to its founding principles. It reminds us that government exists to serve the people, not the other way around, and that the consent of the governed is the ultimate source of legitimacy.

Americans have consistently invoked the principle of challenging unjust laws and oppressive regimes throughout history as a means to uphold their fundamental rights and freedoms. From the earliest days of the nation's founding to the civil rights movement of the 20th century, the right to dissent and resist tyranny has been a fundamental aspect of American political tradition, grounded in a moral imperative to defend freedom and justice. The struggle for independence against British colonial rule serves as a quintessential example of Americans invoking this principle.

The right to dissent and resist tyranny is not only a fundamental aspect of American political tradition but also a moral imperative deeply rooted in the belief that freedom and justice must be actively defended and preserved by an engaged and vigilant citizenry.

The question of state secession, or the right of states to withdraw from the union, has been a contentious issue in American politics since the nation's inception. While the Constitution is silent on the matter of secession, interpretations of the Tenth Amendment have fueled debate over whether states possess the inherent right to secede as a means to protect their sovereignty and individual liberties. The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states or to the people.

This language implies a right of states to withdraw from the union when the federal government oversteps its bounds and infringes upon state sovereignty. According to this view, states are sovereign entities that voluntarily entered into the union and retain the right to withdraw if the terms of that union are violated or if the federal government becomes tyrannical. This interpretation of the Tenth Amendment is rooted in the principles of federalism and states' rights, which hold that states possess certain inherent powers and prerogatives that cannot be usurped by the federal government.

The question of state secession came to a head during the Civil War when eleven southern states seceded from the union in response to growing tensions over slavery and states' rights. The ensuing conflict, which resulted in the defeat of the Confederate states, settled the issue of secession through force of arms and established the principle that states do not possess a unilateral right to secede from the union. However, the debate over state secession has persisted in American politics, with proponents of states' rights continuing to argue for the right of states to withdraw from the union under certain circumstances.

In conclusion, the right to overturn tyrannical governments and the principle of state secession are deeply ingrained in the American political tradition, reflecting a commitment to individual liberty, self-governance, and the sovereignty of the people and the states. Their existence serves as a vital check against the concentration of power and the erosion of democratic freedoms. As guardians of liberty, it is incumbent upon Americans to uphold these principles and defend them against all threats, both foreign and domestic, to ensure the continued vitality of the nation's democratic experiment.

All of this and more is discussed in "CODE RED: The Secret Communist Takeover of America."



James Parrish Hodges, Ph.D., Author

Winner of the Freedoms Foundation at Valley Forge Medal of Honor
Member: National Speakers Association, American Society for Training and Development


Cynthia F. Hodges, JD, LLM, MA
Attorney and Author

Auriga Books, LLC
Email: cyn (at)




No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for your comments. They will appear once they have been approved.