Only in relation to other Nations. As a Federalist – as opposed to the anti-federalist so called “federalist society” – I adhere to the idea of “individual sovereignty” as expounded by Our 1st Chief Justice John Jay (see his final decision for Chisholm v Georgia) who coined the term “sovereigns without subjects”. This is in contrast to aberrant ideas such as State Sovereignty under the dogma of States Rights, which in reality is this very same relation – viz., sovereignty in pari materia other States. The problem with States Rights ideology is that it pits the State against Individuals and creates a conflict in general law because the very idea of sovereignty itself is an extension of and from the individual prior to the US of A – a monarch; and under the strict construction doctrine that status cannot be extended further than it’s purpose expressed under the law (the law of nations – see US Const Art 1 sec 8) which is Not to pit the State against the individual nor a majority of them – which paradoxically has happened by default on account of this aberrant State Rights theory. The most absurd aspect of the whole thing is that the Conservatives again in this case Jefferson and his Democratic-republicans were/are as wrong as those opposing Gay marriage – viz., they admit it’s a legal Liberty so they need a Constitutional Amendment to make it illegal. Hence the 11th A. Think it through you’ll see my conclusion is irresistible … only to remark