Reaction::Texas v. White

Texas::states    State::united    Bonds::murray    White::union    Chase::court    Supreme::state

Reaction The Court's decision, written by Chase, was criticized by both sides. Radical Republicans saw this as evidence that Chase was abandoning a cause he had once enthusiastically supported. Conservatives condemned Chase for a decision that would allow congressional reconstruction to continue.<ref>Niven p. 438</ref>

In December, Lyman Trumbull, using the Miller-Swayne dissent as his model, introduced legislation to overcome the White decision. Trumbull's bill stated that "under the Constitution, the judicial power of the United States does not embrace political power, or give to judicial tribunals any authority to question the political departments of the Government on political questions". In a direct attack on Chase's position the bill stipulated that "it rests with Congress to decide what Government is the established one in a State, and that it is hereby, in accordance with former legislation, declared that no civil State Government exists in Virginia, Mississippi, or Texas." The legislation was defeated by the more conservative members of Congress.<ref>Ross pp. 162–163</ref>

Aleksandar Pavković and Peter Radan in Creating New States: Theory and Practice of Secession "hold that the entry 'There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States' was not surprising. Given that the United States was born from revolution, Chase's words echo what had been stated by many legal scholars and politicians of the day, including Abraham Lincoln and Daniel Webster."<ref>Aleksandar Pavković, Peter Radan, Creating New States: Theory and Practice of Secession, p. 222, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2007.</ref>

Texas v. White sections
Intro  Background  Arguments  Decision  Reaction  See also  References  Further reading  External links  

Reaction
PREVIOUS: Decision	NEXT: See also
<<	>>