Joseph Story Quotes
The true test is, whether the object be of a local character, and local use; or, whether it be of general benefit to the states. If it be purely local, congress cannot constitutionally appropriate money for the object. But, if the benefit be general, it matters not, whether in point of locality it be in one state, or several; whether it be of large, or of small extent.
Story, Joseph. Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. Vol. 2, Hilliard, Gray, and Company, 1833, p. 447.
Commonly referred to as the Kentucky Resolution. This concept of Nullification was one of the factors that aggravated the tensions leading to the Civil War. Were the individual States to be the arbiters of whether or not a Federal act was Constitutional or was it to be the Supreme Court.
In addition, most state and local corrupt officials are detected, and prosecuted by Federal law enforcement officials as local and sometimes state corruption involves the local and state law enforcement officials as well as others so local authorities often turn a blind eye towards corruption.
Joseph Story was an American lawyer and jurist who served on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1812 to 1845, during the Marshall Court and early-Taney Court eras. He is most remembered for his opinions in Martin v. Hunter's Lessee and The Amistad case, and especially for his magisterial Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, first published in 1833. Dominating the field in the 19th century, this work is a cornerstone of early American jurisprudence. It is the second comprehensive treatise on the provisions of the U.S. Constitution and remains a critical source of historical information about the forming of the American republic and the early struggles to define its law.