Once again you've turned our republic on it's head. The Constitution acts as chains on the power of fedgov; the 10th Amendment thereto insures that it shall never be reversed. Expulsion of a state by federal action would be an unenumerated power and thus the only way it can exist would be if it were necessary and proper to carry out one of the enumerated powers. It is not.
This is the same bass-ackward interpretation of our system of government that you've used a hundred times in justifying suspension of habeus corpus. Expulsion of a state is an unenumerated power. Suspension of the writ is specifically delegated to the legislature. "It's not in there" is the admission that you make. What does the BOR say about powers that are "not in there?" How is it the most basic elements of Republican government escape you?
Others share your views of the Constitution. They are not to be found on a website dedicated to the advancement of conservatism.
I'm not talking about Bush getting a wild hair up his butt and kicking out Massachusetts. I'm asking why the states, through a vote of their representatives in Congress, cannot expel another state? Where is that power forbidden to the states? And where is this Constitutional acid test that determines when action is 'necessary and proper' and when it is not?