This is the third post in a series on Yale’s Akhil Reed Amar’s criticism of Thomas Jefferson. Follow these links for Part I and Part 2.
In the two previous posts, I dealt with Amar’s criticism of Jefferson related to the Virginian’s opposition to the national bank and his advocacy of nullification. This post deals with Jefferson and secession, which Amar blasts as follows: “He played footsie with the plainly unconstitutional idea that a state could unilaterally secede. (At one point he nonchalantly declared that whether America remained united or instead divided into two parts was “not very important” to American ‘happiness.’
