"those States, have done nothing to change it."
States cannot do anything.
In fact a Dictator named Washington conscripted an Army in 1794 and then invaded Pennsilvania to collect on a tax, which was to enforce a money monopoly.
Washington did something. A State did nothing, it can't, a State is a fictitious legal being, so it is merely a convenience to employ one name, State, instead of listing all the names of all the people who do things in that State.
I don't have time for this, so if you want to competitively offer viewpoints then address your understanding of what Washington did during what became known as The Whiskey Rebellion.
Shays's Rebellion occurred under The Articles of Confederation, in one State, Massachusetts.
Those events that became known as Shays's Rebellion exemplify how The Articles of Confederation Limited what "The President" could or could not do, and that can be compared to what was done by "The President" after The Articles of Confederation were replaced as the excuse, or "rationale" (or argument) for what Washington did in Pennsylvania.