|
Post by avordvet on Jul 9, 2009 16:19:08 GMT -5
The State Secession Issue & Texas v. White by Steven D. Laib | June 27th, 2009 The Supreme Court's 1868 decision that states cannot leave the Union was wrong. Here's why. In my experience, whenever the subject of the Confederate secession or of a modern attempt at the same thing occurs someone is bound to respond with a reference to the infamous case of Texas v. White (7 Wall. 700 ). This Reconstruction Era case was written essentially to put a headstone on the Confederacy's grave and to stifle any other State's interests in leaving the Union in the future. It was in all significant respects a politically motivated decision. It ignored certain specific constitutional provisions as well as prior decisions of the court. In short, the decision was just plain wrong. A lot of readers may ask why this particular case of relevant today. The answer lies in the fact that the subject is now being discussed again by many citizens to a degree not experienced since 1860. There is a good reason for it. The overbearing attitude of the federal government which is trampling on and attempting to further trample on the rights of the states and the citizens makes many patriotic individuals wonder whether or not the only way to save the USA is to destroy it and rebuild it in the image of what the founders intended in 1789. If all of the states all broke of and left the feds hanging as a government without a country, it would present a singular problem for those who want to wield power. Of course, there are many individuals who put down this idea for various reasons. Some go so far as to assert that states cannot secede. These people are wrong, at least within the bounds of U.S. Constitutional law. An analysis of why follows. Story Continues: www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/06/27/the-state-secession-issue-texas-v-white/
|
|
|
Post by brocktownsend on Jul 9, 2009 19:26:53 GMT -5
" This Reconstruction Era case was written essentially to put a headstone on the Confederacy's grave and to stifle any other State's interests in leaving the Union in the future. It was in all significant respects a politically motivated decision."Man, don't get me started on this! Natural, Contractual, And Constitutional Right Of Secessionwww.namsouth.com/viewtopic.php?t=156&highlight=secession"And . . . does anyone seriously believe for one minute that any of the 13 states would have ratified the Constitution had they believed that it was a perpetual one-way Venus fly trap -- a one-way ticket to sovereign suicide? The Constitution was barely ratified as it is!" James Buchanan...Secession Is Legal, In Effectwww.namsouth.com/viewtopic.php?t=63&highlight=secession"The question fairly stated is, Has the Constitution delegated to Congress the power to coerce a State into submission which is attempting to withdraw or has actually withdrawn from the Confederacy? If answered in the affirmative, it must be on the principle that the power has been conferred upon Congress to declare and to make war against a State. After much serious reflection I have arrived at the conclusion that no such power has been delegated to Congress or to any other department of the Federal Government. It is manifest upon an inspection of the Constitution that this is not among the specific and enumerated powers granted to Congress, and it is equally apparent that its exercise is not "necessary and proper for carrying into execution" any one of these powers."Secession Is Not Rebellion" Chief Justice Salmonwww.namsouth.com/viewtopic.php?t=178&highlight=secessionThat Chief Justice Salmon Chase was determined that Davis not be tried for treason is clear from the following extracts from Johnson's Reports of his Supreme Court decisions: “If you bring these (Confederate) leaders to trial, it will condemn the North, for by the Constitution, secession is not rebellion. His (Jefferson Davis’) capture was a mistake. His trial will be a greater one. We cannot convict him of treason.”Salmon P. Chase, Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, 1867 THE SECESSION OF 1861 FOUNDED UPON LEGAL RIGHTwww.namsouth.com/viewtopic.php?t=509&highlight=secessionSecession rested upon fundamental law. The secession from the United States be several States of the South in 1861, which led to the war between the Confederacy and the Federal Government aided by the remaining States, was within constitutional right found in that greatest governmental instrument, the Constitution of the United States. That secession was the extreme means, in the sense that the right of revolution as such a means is sometimes justified, for the purpose of preserving the sacredness and blessings of written constitutional government, and for these purposes only. West Point Instruction Taught Lee That Secession Was Legalwww.namsouth.com/viewtopic.php?t=1562&highlight=secession(*Robert E. Lee told Bishop Wilmer, of Louisiana, that if it had not been for the instruction received from Rawle’s text-book at West Point he would not have left the United States Army and joined the Confederate Army at the breaking out of the War.) Was The Invasion Of The Confederate States A Lawful Act?www.namsouth.com/viewtopic.php?t=781&highlight=secessionAn Analysis of President Lincoln's Legal Arguments Against Secession
|
|
|
Post by avordvet on Jul 10, 2009 5:14:00 GMT -5
I heard that! its one of my hot points also... A one way suicide pact to the very end... NOT!
|
|
ironwill
State District POC
Denver Colorado District POC
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws. ? Tacitus
Posts: 201
|
Post by ironwill on Jul 10, 2009 9:41:06 GMT -5
But... but... but the .gov school taught me that Lincoln was an 'honest' man who freed the slaves and that was why we had a Civil War. I can't believe people still believe this. Well, maybe I can. After all, the majority of kids are sent to .gov schools with only 1 viewpoint on such subject matters. Not until I started researching the facts in college that I was able to see that Lincoln was wrong. In fact, the more that (p)Resident Øbama does, the more like Lincoln he becomes. In the event of any future secession, will any of you Southern States accept a Rocky Mountain man and his family? I'll bring my own 'tools'. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Patriots Support on Jul 10, 2009 10:35:44 GMT -5
You and yours would be most welcome here in Va.
|
|
|
Post by brocktownsend on Jul 10, 2009 12:35:21 GMT -5
But... but... but the .gov school taught me that Lincoln was an 'honest' man who freed the slaves and that was why we had a Civil War. I can't believe people still believe this. Well, maybe I can. After all, the majority of kids are sent to .gov schools with only 1 viewpoint on such subject matters. Not until I started researching the facts in college that I was able to see that Lincoln was wrong. In fact, the more that (p)Resident Øbama does, the more like Lincoln he becomes. In the event of any future secession, will any of you Southern States accept a Rocky Mountain man and his family? I'll bring my own 'tools'. ;D When the news came out that he was going to take the train like the Tyrant did through Baltimore, I smiled thinking of what happened when Lincoln did it.
|
|
|
Post by lighteye on Jul 10, 2009 12:59:00 GMT -5
But... but... but the .gov school taught me that Lincoln was an 'honest' man who freed the slaves and that was why we had a Civil War. I can't believe people still believe this. Well, maybe I can. After all, the majority of kids are sent to .gov schools with only 1 viewpoint on such subject matters. Not until I started researching the facts in college that I was able to see that Lincoln was wrong. In fact, the more that (p)Resident Øbama does, the more like Lincoln he becomes. In the event of any future secession, will any of you Southern States accept a Rocky Mountain man and his family? I'll bring my own 'tools'. ;D I had to explain this to the wife last night...she had thought it was all about owning unpaid cotton pickers. I clued her in and she saw the light just fine.
|
|