Section 2 makes clear that the States must be considered separate entities in the trial of crimes, just as they are considered separate entities in the election of Congressmen: Crimes are to be tried “in the State where the said crimes shall have been committed.” _Article IV._ All four sections of the Fourth Article are concerned with the States, their citizens, their obligations to other States, and their rights as members of the Federal Union. Here is the provision that “full faith and credit shall be given in each State to the public acts, records and judicial proceedings of every other State.” The second section explicitly acknowledges State citizenship as distinct from United States citizenship. It says that “the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States.” This section also provides for the extradition of persons charged with crime, and prior to the Thirteenth Amendment, for the compulsory return of fugitive slaves. Section 3 protects the States from having new States carved out of their territory. Section 4 guarantees “to every State in this Union a republican form of government.” _Article V._ The brief provision dealing with amendment of the Constitution is of paramount importance in any understanding of the South’s protest against the school decision. John Taylor of Caroline once defined sovereignty as “the will to enact, the power to execute.” John Marshall spoke in the _Cohens_ case of the “supreme and irresistible power to make and unmake.” Article V defines and locates this supreme power--not in “the whole body of the people,” as Marshall carelessly remarked, but in “three-fourths of the several States.” The scheme for amendment of the Constitution goes to the very essence of what makes the American Union great and unique among the powers of the earth: We do not accept the supremacy of “majority rule.” If there is one ancient parliamentary principle to which the Constitution does _not_ subscribe, it is the principle of majority rule. In every major question touched upon in the Constitution--for the impeachment of officers, the overriding of a veto, the ratification of a treaty, the proposing and adopting of amendments to the Constitution--in all of these, mere majorities are not enough. Some margin of more than a majority is required. And when it comes to changing the Constitution itself, the explicit provision is that no change can be made without the expressed and tacit approval of at least three-fourths _of the States_. The laws, customs, desires, preferences of a minority of the States are not to be blindly overthrown by any 51 per cent of the people; and until the _Brown_ case came along, it was not imagined in the South that Article V could be suspended, and the Constitution effectively amended, by the will of nine judges.