You know better than that.
Constitutionally, the U.S. Supreme Court does not declare war, and didn't in this case.
The ruling itself says war can be said to have started on different dates in different places, and merely for purposes of compensation in a civil suit chose the date of Lincoln's blockade announcement.
In fact, for months before that date Confederates had repeatedly provoked war, and started war at Fort Sumter.
As we have now repeatedly reviewed, a major military action attacking a country's military forces, such as Fort Sumter, is an act of war, period.
Union troops died in that action and were forced to surrender.
Any serious student knows that's the actual start of war, as surely as were Pearl Harbor and 9/11/01.
By contrast, Lincoln's response in calling for troops and a blockade were mere announcements, no battles were fought on that date, no Confederate soldiers killed.
Indeed, the first Confederate soldier killed in battle did not happen until June 10, six weeks later.
That was the true start of the Union's war, but by then Confederates had already been fighting for months with little to no Northern military response.
Of course you know all that, because you've been told it now many times.
So truth doesn't matter a whit to DiogenesLamp, does it?
This is a lie. This is a deliberate lie, with deliberate intent to deceive.
You know very well no one was killed by the bombardment of Ft. Sumter. The people who were killed were due to a military accident while engaged in the firing of their cannon during the surrender ceremony.
You also overlook the fact that Major Anderson seized that Fort. He was assigned to Fort Moultrie, and without warning and with some degree of belligerence, he abandoned Fort Moultrie and seized Fort Sumter.
The people of Port Charleston suddenly had Union cannons looming over their city and harbor. At least one Northern newspaper had already called for the guns of Ft. Sumter to be turned on Charleston. To think they wouldn't regard it as a frightening threat is just naive.