The Governer is NOT the Texas Supreme Court. FWIW, several of the members of the Texas secession convention were justices of that court.
Dissenters were browbeaten and discouraged from participating!
But preventing Southern whites from voting (Reconstruction), or preventing Democrats (Yankee elections 1864) from voting was ok?
You think that's a way to pass laws?
Not passing a law here. It was a call for elections per the Texas Constitution.
We are a nation of laws and due process, not a nation of bullies who got their hands on a gavel.
BINGO! That's why the Governor could not impede the will of the people. He's not a dictator.
It's what Article IV protects us from, states acting without following process or at least allowing a fair hearing from dissenters.
Huh???? Where in Article IV does it stae that the federal government proscribes the legislative process of the several states? Dissidents are heard through the election process.
As were the justices that gave Lautenburg his seat. If I'm another state, I'm not satisfied with their proof. Thugs driving out dissent isn't my idea of good government.
But preventing Southern whites from voting (Reconstruction), or preventing Democrats (Yankee elections 1864) from voting was ok?
Once rebellion was the order of the day, it's up to the Congress to impeach if they think unnecessary steps are taken.
Not passing a law here. It was a call for elections per the Texas Constitution.
Elections where some were threatened not to participate. Not good enough proof for me.
BINGO! That's why the Governor could not impede the will of the people. He's not a dictator.
The people didn't elect, thugs appointed.
Huh???? Where in Article IV does it stae that the federal government proscribes the legislative process of the several states? Dissidents are heard through the election process.
States must allow Congress to guide how a state proves it's acts. If I'm another state, thuggery doesn't make the grade.