Heck No, They Won't Go!: Opposition by Two State Legislatures to U.S. Policy in Vietnam

Abstract

In April 1970 Massachusetts Governor Francis W. Sargent signed a law that forbade the federal government from drafting citizens of Massachusetts and sending them to Vietnam. One year later, Minnesota Governor Wendell Anderson signed a similar bill into law. The language of each law sought to have the U.S. Supreme Court determine whether the U.S. war in Vietnam was unconstitutional because undeclared. State authority in relation to foreign and military policy is not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. Central to this paper is the question of the rights of individual states in relation to the federal government. This paper examines four areas to determine what factors may have influenced legislators in Massachusetts and Minnesota to use state law in their attempt to challenge federal policy. The first area to be examined is presidential use of military power without congressional declaration of war. Also examined are federal court cases, such as Talbot v. Seeman (1801) in which the courts validated the actions of presidents during undeclared war. The Twentieth Century has seen almost continuous involvement by U.S. forces in congressionally authorized yet undeclared conflict. The Tonkin Gulf Resolution, used by Lyndon Johnson to justify the massive commitment of American troops to Vietnam, offered congressional authorization for war without explicit declaration of war. The second area to be examined is the growth and impact of the antiwar movement during the U.S. war in Vietnam. The Vietnam antiwar movement had antecedents in citizen opposition to the draft during the First World War. The structure of the antiwar movement was very complex. There was no overall national organization, nor was there a single command group. After more than two decades of governmental information regarding the need to fight communism all antiwar and anti-draft groups faced the daunting task of re-educating the public. Elected officials, including state legislators, must determine which actions will maximize voter satisfaction. During Am