The courts have held that interposition is not a valid constitutional doctrine when invoked to block enforcement of federal law.
Interposition was first suggested in the Virginia Resolution of 1798, written by James Madison, which stated: That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.By this statement, James Madison asserted that the states are "duty bound to interpose" to prevent the harm that would result from a "deliberate, palpable, and dangerous" unconstitutional action by the federal government.
It belongs not to state legislatures to decide on the constitutionality of laws made by the general government; this power being exclusively vested in the judiciary courts of the Union.
Madison affirmed each part of the Virginia Resolution, and again argued that the states have the right to interpose when they believe a federal law is unconstitutional.
He explained that a state's act of interposition, unlike a judicial interpretation of the Constitution, has no legal effect.
Madison denied that any single state had the right to unilaterally determine that a federal statute is unconstitutional.
Madison argued that interposition would involve some sort of joint action among the states, such as amending the Constitution.
Several southern states attempted to use interposition in the 1950s after the Supreme Court's decision in Brown v. Board of Education, which ruled that segregated schools violate the Constitution.
James J. Kilpatrick, an editor of the Richmond News Leader, wrote a series of editorials urging "massive resistance" to integration of the schools.
Kilpatrick revived the idea of interposition by the states as a constitutional basis for resisting federal government action.
[15] At least ten southern states passed interposition or nullification laws in an effort to prevent integration of their schools.
In the case of Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1 (1958), the Supreme Court rejected the Arkansas effort to use nullification and interposition.
'"[16] Thus, Cooper v. Aaron directly held that state attempts to nullify federal law are ineffective.
"[17] Interposition and nullification were referenced by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in his August 1963 "I Have a Dream" speech, at the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom:[18] I have a dream that one day down in Alabama with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification, one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.Interposition and nullification have been raised recently in several state legislatures.