Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Odd that people keep claiming that states can not leave the union and form their own government when the Declaration of Independence very clearly says this right exists..
...
Leaving the union is abolishing the US government..
The Declaration of Independence was also written 11 years before the US Constitution. When the US Constitution was ratified June 21, 1788, it superceded everything done during the Continental Congress, including the Declaration of Independence.
Article IV, Section 3 of the US Constitution covers the admission of new States to the Union and the disposition of US territory and other property. As long as Congress gives their approval first, any State can secede from the Union.
Quote:
The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.
Source: Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the US Constitution
But is it upto a few on the fringe, the media and politicians that get to decide? We've not been the USSR of the western world, a collection of independent entities forced to be under one law. The states have sovereign rights, and I don't see where they are being infringed upon. But they are not entirely independent entities either, and are accountable to the nation as a whole. It is this accountability that gets the panties twisted for many. And I'm willing to bet, they are irrelevant when it comes to seeing America as a whole. These people have the right to leave, and find a more amicable place for them to live out their dreams, certainly not at the expense of this great nation.
There will always be a tussle for political power, however, and how exactly do you propose protecting the nation from these nutcases?
The Declaration of Independence was also written 11 years before the US Constitution. When the US Constitution was ratified June 21, 1788, it superceded everything done during the Continental Congress, including the Declaration of Independence.
Article IV, Section 3 of the US Constitution covers the admission of new States to the Union and the disposition of US territory and other property. As long as Congress gives their approval first, any State can secede from the Union.
The Declaration of Independence isn't a legislative document. The Constitution is. So the Declaration of Independence is not superceded by the Constitution, and the rationales in the Declaration are still cited as evidence of the intentions and meanings of the Founding Fathers. The US Constitution does not say that any State can secede if Congress approves. The Constitution does not explicitly address secession. The case made by states is that the Constitution does say that if does not expressly enumerate a power or right as belonging to the federal government, then that power or right belongs to the states and the people. Secessionists cite the Declaration of Independence as it provides explicit reasons for rejecting an existing government.
If secession were treason in and of itself, Lincoln would have had grounds for attacking the Southern states when they announced their independence. Instead, he deliberately provoked armed conflict when Congress was not in session so that he could then send an army to deal with the rebellion.
Regardless of the legal merits of secession, Lincoln and Jackson before him, recognized that secession would inevitably lead to failure of the Union. Once the states actually began to secede and to establish a separate government, it was imperative to end secession. By drawing the fire of secessionists, Lincoln created the means to go to war. Might makes right. Once the war was over, it fell to SCOTUS to justify the war. SCOTUS picks and chooses their cases. Not one secessionist was put on trial for treason. Treason would have been tried in federal courts and appeals would have worked their way up to SCOTUS. Instead, a bond case was heard and the decision addressed secession sideways on a weak proposition. The 14th Amendment could have straightforwardly outlawed secession. It did not.
But is it upto a few on the fringe, the media and politicians that get to decide? We've not been the USSR of the western world, a collection of independent entities forced to be under one law. The states have sovereign rights, and I don't see where they are being infringed upon. But they are not entirely independent entities either, and are accountable to the nation as a whole. It is this accountability that gets the panties twisted for many. And I'm willing to bet, they are irrelevant when it comes to seeing America as a whole. These people have the right to leave, and find a more amicable place for them to live out their dreams, certainly not at the expense of this great nation.
There will always be a tussle for political power, however, and how exactly do you propose protecting the nation from these nutcases?
The tussle for political power is the tension that keeps the balance of power in place.
"It is needless to discuss at length the question whether the right of a State to withdraw from the Union for any cause regarded by herself as sufficient is consistent with the Constitution of the United States.
The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and [p725] arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to "be perpetual." And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained "to form a more perfect Union." It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?
But the perpetuity and indissolubility of the Union by no means implies the loss of distinct and individual existence, or of the right of self-government, by the States. Under the Articles of Confederation, each State retained its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right not expressly delegated to the United States. Under the Constitution, though the powers of the States were much restricted, still all powers not delegated to the United States nor prohibited to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. And we have already had occasion to remark at this term that
the people of each State compose a State, having its own government, and endowed with all the functions essential to separate and independent existence,
and that, "without the States in union, there could be no such political body as the United States." [n12] Not only, therefore, can there be no loss of separate and independent autonomy to the States through their union under the Constitution, but it may be not unreasonably said that the preservation of the States, and the maintenance of their governments, are as much within the design and care of the Constitution as the preservation of the Union and the maintenance of the National government. The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union composed of indestructible States. [p726]
When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States."
The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and [p725] arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to "be perpetual." And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained "to form a more perfect Union." It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?
Again, this decision is stretching. From a legal standpoint, the Articles of Confederation governed the original 13 colonies. At no point in history did Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, etc, become signatories or members of the Articles of Confederation. Therefore the "perpetual" clause cannot govern the actions of states who were not members of the original thirteen. The interpretation that "a more perfect Union" is by necessity an indissoluble union is worse than tenuous. Perfection is not inherently indissoluble, nor is it commonly thought to be so.
The tussle for political power is the tension that keeps the balance of power in place.
When we talk in democratic terms, yes, and putting the country first (it has to be more than just a campaign slogan). But I would never underestimate the power of crooks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
