The Nullification Crisis By Rebecca E. Balzan | Summaries United States History

THE NULLIFICATION CRISIS: CONSTITUTIONAL BATTLE OR PERSONAL FEUD?

By: Rebecca E. Balzan

Thesis Statement:

Despite federalism serving as a guiding doctrine for relations between states and the

federal government since the founding of the United States, federalism played a relatively minor

role during the Nullification Crisis of 1830 to 1833 proving less relevant than the overbearing

political tensions and personal animosities existing between two key American political figures,

Andrew Jackson and John C. Calhoun.

Summary:

In an era wrought with sly partisan maneuvering and bombastic personalities competing

for popularity in a changing American political landscape, it is easy to overlook constitutional

conflicts rooted in niche ideological differences. This was the reality of the Jacksonian era. Such

controversies oftentimes paled in comparison to the sweeping legislation enacted under populist

President Andrew Jackson. The Nullification Crisis of 1830 to 1833 was one such conflict that

manifested into national strife between President Jackson and his administration, versus the state

of South Carolina and other states and individuals sympathetic to nullification. This crisis pitted

the federal and state governments against one another, challenging the concept of federalism and

increasing sectional division. Despite its unassuming nature centuries later, the crisis was one of

the crucial precursors that escalated the division between the states and the federal government,

ultimately culminating into secession and the Civil War. Monumental figures, such as President

Andrew Jackson, Vice President John C. Calhoun, New York Senator Martin Van Buren,

Massachusetts Senator Daniel Webster, South Carolina Governor Robert Hayne, and Secretary

of State Henry Clay, each cast sweeping shadows tinted in partisan views and personal

misgivings laced throughout the nullification crisis, causing it to transcend mere ideological

debate on policy, and adopt a more ominous meaning.

Nullification, whether a state can make void a congressional law, dates back to the

foundations of the United States. In relation to federalism, nullification alters the balance

between the federal and state governments and shifts the subordinate power of the states and

allows them to adopt a power reserved to the federal government. The crisis originated from a

conflict caused by the Tariff of 1828, and grew into national strife, pitting the federal

government against South Carolina and the president against the vice president. Since the crisis

appears to be rooted in political ideology and was seemingly “resolved” with the Compromise

Tariff of 1833, its significance is easily downplayed. Yet, the crisis reveals a nation affected by

19th century concerns unimagined or purposely ignored by the founders, and reflected increasing

sectionalism between the North, the South, and the West. Deeply rooted and intertwined in this

policy conundrum are speeches instigating the crisis’s perpetuation. The mounting tensions

between President Jackson and John C. Calhoun, the champions of anti-nullification and

nullification respectively, and key events led to a climax and eventually “resolution” of the issue.

Historical Framework:

A brief timeline of events that led to the culmination of the crisis include: the adoption of

the protective Tariff of 1824; the subsequent Tariff of 1828, also known as the Tariff of

The Nullification Crisis By Rebecca E. Balzan, Summaries of United States History