The very occupation of the fort by the army of a foreign power is a provocation.
there was no right to secede in the manner the South chose to pursue.
Being that there is no provision in the Constitution for secession that leaves it in the purview of the tenth amendment as a right reserved to the state. There is no codified procedure for secession so the South was within their rights to separate as they saw fit. The North would have been better to seek redress for their grievances concerning the debt and property after abandoning the forts.
Complete nonsense.
That is not an argument
Would you agree then that the states also have the right to expel a state from the Union against its will? There is nothing in the Constitution that states that they can't either.
I don’t disagree. I would be willing to hear a motion to expel Massachusetts.
;)
But it was their fort. How can that be a provocation?
Being that there is no provision in the Constitution for secession that leaves it in the purview of the tenth amendment as a right reserved to the state.
No. It's clear from Article I and Article IV that approving the admission of states and approving any change in status once they have been allowed to join are powers reserved to Congress. By implication that includes leaving entirely.
The North would have been better to seek redress for their grievances concerning the debt and property after abandoning the forts.
How? Through a war? The South walked away from the debt and stolen everything they could get their hands on. What redress did the North have to compel them to pay up?
That is not an argument
But is an accurate description.