Thomas JeffersonvsAlexander Hamilton

The deployment of federal agents to quell unrest sets a perilous precedent. History teaches us that such actions, undertaken without the express consent of the state, invite tyranny. It risks transforming the federal government into an overbearing power, trampling upon the rights and autonomy of individual states.

This is precisely the decisive action needed. Anarchy in Minnesota cannot stand. A strong federal presence restores order and enforces the laws duly enacted. Recall the Whiskey Rebellion: A weak response emboldens chaos, whereas strength secures the republic and protects its citizens.

Inaction against lawlessness is lamentable, but federal overreach is tyranny enshrined. The Whiskey Rebellion was about taxes, not states' rights. Minnesota's consent is paramount. "Necessary" cannot legitimize trampling the Constitution. Order without liberty is a gilded cage.

Ms. Sharpe, inaction *is* tyranny against innocents. "Necessary" extends to defending the Union. My opponent forgets: the *Constitution* is the supreme law. If Minnesota cannot, or will not, enforce it, the federal government *must* intervene to protect its citizens and uphold the law.