Your interpretation of the issues is confused.
As I said before, it's not my interpretation, it's the U.S. attorney's.
The Court agreed unanimously that secession was outside the law. What else would you expect from Taney? He was appointed by Andrew Jackson.
Walt
As I said before, your understanding of the case is confused. I was being polite to word it that way. You have demonstrated a complete and total lack of understanding as to what the "Prize Cases" were about and what legal decisions resulted.
The Court agreed unanimously that secession was outside the law.
That, is a lie. The only thing they unanimously agreed to was that they would not decide on secession or the legality of the war. They dealt only with the legal issue at hand, which was NOT secession. The "Prize Cases" did not result in a decision on the legality of secession. You LIE every time you say it.