This is where you – like so many – go wrong. The Constitution doesn’t “grant” anything to the states or to the people. It *gurantees* rights that *pre-exist* the Constitution, i.e., those that exist by divine right or by natural law, whichever you prefer.

The only entity to whom the Constitution “grants” anything is the *federal government itself*, which is only logical because the Constituton CREATES the federal government. The state governments existed before it ever came into being, as did, of course, the people.

The power to nullify devolves from the same principle you quote: that an unconstitutional act is not a law. (See also Norton v. Shelby County, 118 US 425) If it’s not law, it can be ignored regardless of what the Supreme Court says. If that were not so, the Supreme Court would be the sole arbiter of the Constitution – and therefore would be a tyrant, but although it did arrogate that power to itself with some measure of success (see Marbury v. Madison), it is clear that the Constitution itself never gave the Supreme Court that power.

All you have is essentially an argument that people should follow Madison’s opinion (for that is all what you have quoted is) more than Jefferson’s. If there’s anything that’s “unconstitutional” here, then it’s Chief Justice Marshall’s opinion in Marbury v. Madison itself, for that ultimate power is nowhere to be found in the Constitution. It was usurped from the peole and the state by Marshall and his colleagues in the court. What was wrongly usurped can rightfully be taken back.

The Constitution expressly denies the states a number of things – because the states decided to give them up and delegate them to the federal government. The right of Nullification is not among those.

In the end, my friend, you expose yourself as a statist (in the modern sense, not in the sense of being pro states’ rights).