Oops, big lump of your posts....

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Status
Not open for further replies.

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,948
Location
los angeles ca
The 13 Colonies were not a sovereign nation, but was/were in defiance of British law...ect ect ect..
George Washington was nnot a commissioned officer as the United States did not exist..blahblah


Simply put, "to the victor belong the spoils"...New York Senator William L. Marcy
Not true once Spain,France and the Netherlands recognized the Colonial Rebels.
Leftyhunter
 

ucvrelics

Major
Forum Host
Joined
May 7, 2016
Messages
8,065
Location
Alabama
Hey wait a minute...If the CSA did not exist, who is gonna pay me the 6% owed on my Confederate bonds ????
Just hang on to them as we are only at Half Time:D

Have you ever been told "You have the right to remain silent but you can't" I normally don't weigh in on these treads and I see the bats are out early tonight :bat: The one thing that is being overlooked is STATES RIGHT, (which is what the CW was fought over anyway). The Southern States under their constitutions had the right to seceded.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

thomas aagaard

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
3,895
Location
Denmark
It does no such thing. The states unilaterally and voluntarily acceded to the union, and in the absence of a constitutional provision, and consistent with the right to alter and abolish systems of government, each and every state held the right to political independence.
Only the original 13 states can make any claim to this right. And they lost it when they rectified the Constitution.
(and no, Texas very clearly gave up their sovereignty when they joined)

Everything else was US territory and had cost the US money and US lives.
And the Constitution make it completely clear that a state can not declarer that federal law do not govern it.
(Article VI, Clause 2)
And since the make up the union is federal law, any bill passed by a state house that say something is no longer part of the union is automatically unconstitutional.
So yes, the Constitution do make unilateral secession illegal. (But secession with the consent of the other states should be doable)

Edited; personal remarks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Viper21

Sergeant Major
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
2,480
Location
Rockbridge County, Virginia
At least a third of the state felt so, that which became West Virginia. oops.
Ahhhh...... the secession of West Virginia by a self appointed Kangaroo Government. Ultimately approved of by Lincoln & the Union June '63. See secession is fine, & legal one way, just not the other....LOL

It is said the admission of West Virginia is secession, and tolerated only because it is our secession. Well, if we can call it by that name, there is still difference enough between secession against the Constitution, and secession in favor of the Constitution.’’
~ Honest Abe
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Kelly

Corporal
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
490
Please, spend the weekend reading the thousands of post that is on this forum covering that topic.
Only the original 13 states can make any claim to this mythical right. And they lost it when they rectified the Constitution.
(and no, Texas very clearly gave up their sovereignty when they joined)

Everything else was US territory and had cost the US money and US lives.
And the Constitution make it completely clear that a state can not declarer that federal law do not govern it.
(Article VI, Clause 2)
And since the make up the union is federal law, any bill passed by a state house that say something is no longer part of the union is automatically unconstitutional.
So yes, the Constitution do make unilateral secession illegal. (But secession with the consent of the other states should be doable)

The US has abided by the Declaratory Theory of Statehood ever since the Declaration of Independence codified it. The Declartory Theory was also codified in the Montevideo Accords. And if unilateral secession is illegal, it should be easy to point the specific proven which outlaws it.

Edited; personal remarks
 
Last edited by a moderator:

thomas aagaard

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
3,895
Location
Denmark
the US has abided by the Declaratory Theory of Statehood ever since the Declaration of Independence codified it. The Declartory Theory was also codified in the Montevideo Accords. And if unilateral secession is illegal, it should be easy for to point the specific proven which outlaws it. .
Article VI, Clause 2.


Edited; personal remarks
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Kelly

Corporal
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
490
On this forum it is the norm that you back up your claims with primary sources. Something you have not done at any point in this topic.

You are the one making the claim... you are the one who have to prove it.
(since proving a negative is impossible)


I already done so. Article VI, Clause 2.

If you want to be taken serious, start backing up you claimed with sources... something you have not done even just one time.
Please provide the quote from Article VI which states secession is unlawful.

Edited; personal remarks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Kelly

Corporal
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
490
Have read the US Supreme Court decision Texas v.White which states that Secession is illegal?
Leftyhunter

Are you claiming that Texas v White adjudicated the constitutional right of secession? Because both Chase for the majority, and Grier in dissent, both emphatically said it did not.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,948
Location
los angeles ca
Are you claiming that Texas v White adjudicated the constitutional right of secession? Because both Chase for the majority, and Grier in dissent, both emphatically said it did not.
It certainly adjudicated the right of violent Secession which is what occurred in the ACW. At no time did the Confederacy seek the protection of the federal courts one did the Secessionists seek congressional approval for Secession.
Leftyhunter
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

E_just_E

Captain
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Messages
6,174
Location
Center Valley, PA
Thread has been locked pending moderator review and cleanup.

Deleting all personal attacks and personal remarks. Please keep the discussion on the subject and not on other posters. If the thread reopens, further violators will be threadbanned.

Posted as a moderator.
 

Drew

Major
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
7,861
All three branches of government are equal.

Politics decides if a President can oppose a court's decision.

We must not forget the Supreme Court Justices are men and not moral Gods. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and supreme power of writ over all branches of government by the Supreme Court would be too much for the nation.

The constitution isn't designed to allow 6 or 9 justices to have the final and only determination as to what the "law of the land will be."
If the supreme court had power of writ over executive powers and congress, then the nation would be a dictatorial system of government ruled by only 6 or 9 men that were Kings for Life.


That is why the power of writ is held by the lower courts, and basically only the Supreme Court has the power of review. It is not unconstitutional for the President and Congress to decide what the law of the land will be without the Supreme Court blessing.

Lincoln opponents always criticize him as being an abuser of executive power, but never seem to acknowledge that the power of writ over the executive branch wouldn't be an abuse of power by the Supreme Court.
No, you don't understand how the system works. That's OK, most people don't.

Courts in our system do not have the power to act, unless an aggrieved person petitions them to do so. Should a court decide what the Congress or the president has done is unconstitutional, that's the end of it. There may be appeals, but the Courts decide.

They're not supposed to make policy, but to interpret the Constitution. That's how it works.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,948
Location
los angeles ca
There was no rebellion, it was secession.
"Marshal Law against Rebels"
It was marshal Law against the Union!! He purposely violate the 1st Amendment. And others.

add-
1st Amendment
4th Amendment
9th Amendment
10th Amendment

Basically, he shunned the US Constitution all together.
Can you please cite then contemporary case law to support your assertion?
Leftyhunter
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top