Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Non-Sequitur
Constitutionally they could not per Article I, Section 8, Clause 17.

The Constitution had nothing to do with it after South Carolina withdrew, but you knew that.

1,146 posted on 03/24/2010 9:39:28 AM PDT by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1126 | View Replies ]


To: lentulusgracchus
The Constitution had nothing to do with it after South Carolina withdrew, but you knew that.

It would still apply to the U.S. government. Sumter could not be relinquished without congressional approval.

And as I pointed out to rustbucket, eminent domain is a process governments use for acquiring private property for public use. Assuming for the sake of arguement that the southern secessions were legal, Sumter would then be the property of a foreign government. Eminent domain would not apply.

1,151 posted on 03/24/2010 10:08:27 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1146 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson