Secessionists Raided by Armed Feds

[CQmethodist]

"Owned" is an incredibly loaded term. Being the subject of the British Crown was far different from being owned in the sense of slavery. Your understanding of the origins of the United States seems very stunted and incomplete.

 

[brinny]

"Owned" is an incredibly loaded term. Being the subject of the British Crown was far different from being owned in the sense of slavery. Your understanding of the origins of the United States seems very stunted and incomplete.

Thank you kindly for sharing your opinion.

 

[TLK Valentine]

And the invasion would also be illegal as they are exercising their rights under the constitution but of course none of that matters

The Constitution only applies to US citizens on US soil.... When you secede from the US, guess what you're not anymore?

 

[psalms 91]

The Constitution does not give states the right to secede from the Union. Both the Civil War and the Supreme Court have disproven that notion.

No, they just trampled states rights but they are still there. The wording hasnt changed, just the federal government imposing its will on all and never a thought to their legal rights

 

[CaDan]

No, they just trampled states rights but they are still there. The wording hasnt changed, just the federal government imposing its will on all and never a thought to their legal rights

Of course the wording has changed. The Constitution has been amended numerous times.

 

[psalms 91]

Of course the wording has changed. The Constitution has been amended numerous times.

Not the section to which I was referring

 

[CaDan]

Not the section to which I was referring

How about a citation to the article/section?

Or withdraw the claim.

 

[psalms 91]

How about a citation to the article/section?

Or withdraw the claim.

Your the lawyer so I am sure you know how to Google it

 

[CQmethodist]

Weak dodge.

 

[psalms 91]

I dont dodge, I also dont look stuff up that others can , this is a forum to express ideas and beliefs, what was done is an old trick to get sopmeone to not express their views

 

[TLK Valentine]

I dont dodge, I also dont look stuff up that others can , this is a forum to express ideas and beliefs, what was done is an old trick to get sopmeone to not express their views

And thus your old trick was easily caught.

 

[Arcangl86]

I dont dodge, I also dont look stuff up that others can , this is a forum to express ideas and beliefs, what was done is an old trick to get sopmeone to not express their views

So, you can't support your argument. Got it.

 

[psalms 91]

sigh, I can either spend my time looking stuff up that others can easily do or I can be on here, I dont live on here so my time is limited. If you choose to dismiss it so be it but the facts dont change

 

[Arcangl86]

sigh, I can either spend my time looking stuff up that others can easily do or I can be on here, I dont live on here so my time is limited. If you choose to dismiss it so be it but the facts dont change

The thing of it is though, you just saying something does not make it fact. And as somebody who has taken a course in Constitutional law, I know that there is nothing in the Constitution about secession.

 

[psalms 91]

The thing of it is though, you just saying something does not make it fact. And as somebody who has taken a course in Constitutional law, I know that there is nothing in the Constitution about secession.

Then where is it? I know thaty when formed it was as confederation that any state could pull out of and as far as I know that hasnt changed

 

[essentialsaltes]

Then where is it? I know thaty when formed it was as confederation that any state could pull out of and as far as I know that hasnt changed

Where is what? You are the one contending that there is some clause referring to secession somewhere. You tell us.

If you're referring to the Articles of Confederation (which preceded the Constitution) it says "And the Articles of this Confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union shall be perpetual"

States could not pull out of the Confederation.

 

[CQmethodist]

Then where is it? I know thaty when formed it was as confederation that any state could pull out of and as far as I know that hasnt changed

The loose confederation of states, under a document called The Articles of Confederation, was overthrown in what was effectively a coup in 1787-88 that produced our current Constitution. But even that loose confederation specifically stated that it could not be dissolved.

Once ratified by two-thirds of the states, the Constitution was legally binding. It provides no mechanism for a state that enters the Union to leave, and the Supreme Court has upheld the unbreakable nature of the Union. Neither the states that formed it, nor the sovereign nations that subsequently were integrated into it (Vermont and Texas), nor the states formed from territory captured or purchased by the central government, have any legal recourse to leave the Union.

If they want to go, they would have to overthrow the law, which several traitorous, dishonorable states attempted to do in the 1860s. Fortunately, their insurrection was crushed.

 

[psalms 91]

The loose confederation of states, under a document called The Articles of Confederation, was overthrown in what was effectively a coup in 1787-88 that produced our current Constitution. But even that loose confederation specifically stated that it could not be dissolved.

Once ratified by two-thirds of the states, the Constitution was legally binding. It provides no mechanism for a state that enters the Union to leave, and the Supreme Court has upheld the unbreakable nature of the Union. Neither the states that formed it, nor the sovereign nations that subsequently were integrated into it (Vermont and Texas), nor the states formed from territory captured or purchased by the central government, have any legal recourse to leave the Union.

If they want to go, they would have to overthrow the law, which several traitorous, dishonorable states attempted to do in the 1860s. Fortunately, their insurrection was crushed.

Then what about states rights? Seems that if a majority choose to leave then they should be allowed to do that

 

[Desk trauma]

Then what about states rights? Seems that if a majority choose to leave then they should be allowed to do that

There is not a process to leave legal at present, if people are that adamant about it they should start the process of amending the constitution to allow for it.

 

[rambot]

There is not a process to leave legal at present, if people are that adamant about it they should start the process of amending the constitution to allow for it.

That requires a lot of lawyers and book learnin' and money I'm sure. Why do that when...guns?