Discuss secession

ickysdad

Private
Joined
Jun 24, 2015
Where are the founding fathers in this discussion??? I understand that James Madison was practically the prime "father" of the document and didn't he say something like that that only the people as in the people of the whole country could dismantle the constitution/union?

I don't know if one is allowed to link to other forums but I remember starting a thread on JP's Panzers back in 2008 titled "ACW versus war of Northern Aggression" it was a rather interesting discussion. If this is not allowed my apologies......
http://panzercentral.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=91&t=40107
 
Last edited:

Rebforever

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Article I, Section 10 and Article IV, Section 3. Congressional approval is needed for a state to join the union. Once allowed to join, congressional approval is needed before a state can partition, join with another state, or change their borders by a fraction of an inch. If congressional approval is needed for any other change in a state's status then implied in that is the need for congressional approval to leave as well.
I don't see secession in that Article. Try again.
 

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Cannot claim illegality either.
The problem is the Constitution protections for powers. For example flying a CBF on private property is protected even if the municipality says otherwise. Without that protection then there is no protection for things like taking Federal Property. If there was a Constitutional Power of Secession then Fort Sumter would have never happen, the fort would have belonged to SC and there would have been no dispute over sovereignty. So thank you for acknowledging that there is not a Constitutional power of secession.

Without a Constitutional Power of Secession then all those things that go into seceding are illegal under Federal Statues. Taking federal property, failing to follow orders of federal officials, interfering with federal law and so on become illegal. Making war on your soverign becomes treason.

In some ethereal, formless, incorporeal, insubstantial political philosophical dimension secession is not 'illegal' but all the things to make it real are illegal.
 

ickysdad

Private
Joined
Jun 24, 2015
1....I ask a couple of things has there ever been any government,constitution or whatever formed where there was a feature that allowed part of the governed to tell the supreme government plainly to go to hell we are not listening to you?

2.... Doesn't strike anyone that after going through an armed uprising/rebellion against Great Britain that our founding fathers would have understood it could happen to what nation they formed also? So if they knew that and wanted the states to be able to leave if they wanted to wouldn't they have included such an important item in to the constitution?
 

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
2.... Doesn't strike anyone that after going through an armed uprising/rebellion against Great Britain that our founding fathers would have understood it could happen to what nation they formed also? So if they knew that and wanted the states to be able to leave if they wanted to wouldn't they have included such an important item in to the constitution?
IMHO the revolutionary fathers gave the US the Articles of Confederation and the result was a failure. Petty much sure thing they did not want to repeat the mistake of soverign States.

IMHO there is also the assertion without evidence that State Sovereignty is an inherently good thing. Failing that test why would the founding fathers want soverign States?
 

Rebforever

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
IMHO the revolutionary fathers gave the US the Articles of Confederation and the result was a failure. Petty much sure thing they did not want to repeat the mistake of soverign States.

IMHO there is also the assertion without evidence that State Sovereignty is an inherently good thing. Failing that test why would the founding fathers want soverign States?
Your evidence suggests that Secession is unconstitutional because it is not in the constitution.
Secession falls under the 10th Amendment.
 

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
The national Constitution is largely concerned with setting up the Federal government. Where it deals with the states, it's mainly to restrict them from certain powers that are given to the Federal government. The Constitution is not a document that exhaustively lists what states can and cannot do (because that is not its purpose or function) and in fact leaves that question rather open-ended with the 9th and 10th amendments. So the fact that secession is not mentioned is not all that meaningful, given that most state powers are not mentioned.



You are roughly correct. The Constitution is a plan of/for a gov't, the details of whose operation is left to the experience over time of the Constitutional Gov't and those of the states, guided and directed by that Constitution.

P.S. I believe you are correct, the silence of the Constitution concerning unilateral secess, is Not all that important, either way.
 
Top