An implied right?
Where would that be found? The same place the Supreme Court found the implied right to privacy that "justifies" abortion? Somewhere in those penumbras Lee found a right to rebel against his country?
It's called the 10th amendment. Maybe you've heard of it?
No, this wouldn’t be the same sort of implied right. That one was made up out of whole cloth. This one would be based on the idea that if a state was free to agree to become part of the union, they are free to stop being part of the union, any language in the constitution to the contrary not being in evidence.
"Technically, it's not treason if you're exercising an implied right under the Constitution..."
An implied right?
Where would that be found? The same place the Supreme Court found the implied right to privacy that "justifies" abortion? Somewhere in those penumbras Lee found a right to rebel against his country?
Taking this out of the Civil War context, I feel compelled to remind you that the Constitution is not a list of rights. It is a complete list of exactly when the federal government may encroach upon our rights.
If a right is not listed in the Constitution, then it is retained by the people. Period, end of story. Or so our Founders thought, though many people have been willing to give up those rights either through fear, laziness or just such a misunderstanding of the Constitution.
No, a different part.
Somewhere in those penumbras Lee found a right to rebel against his country?
Hardly. Lee was under no illusions that the Southern actions were anything other than rebellion, and he certainly did not consider them legal. However, he chose rebellion and loyalty to Virginia over loyalty to his country.
9th and 10th amendments... No mention is made of a Federal authority to STOP secession and according to the 10th, if it’s not SPECIFIED as to BEING a federal power, then IT IS NOT. It belongs to the States (unless prohibited) or to the people. Which means that General Lee was NOT rebelling against his country, but was taking up for his State, which was MORE IMPORTANT to him than the Country... and in those days, loyalty to the State of one’s birth was taken far more seriously than it is now, for FedGov was mostly just an abstraction and NOT the overbearing, mostly unconstitutional all-pervading presence it is nowadays. How hard is that to understand?
(Oh, and MURDER (as in abortion) is NOT a federal issue. It belongs to the states as well.)