True. And by trying to secede unilaterally the states violated that Constitution. As the Supreme Court ruled.
If Congress has to approve it, it is no longer FREEDOM of association, but a restricted association.
If it is freedom of association then why do the states need the approval of Congress to be admitted? Why can't they just say, "We're a state. Here are our Congressmen and Senators?" So I guess it means that association is restricted. Restricted to those currently members and those who they allow to become members.
LOL Non Sequitur. If it wasn't necessary, it would have never been introduced.
One man thought it was necessary. The majority of Congress disagreed. And as the Supreme Court found they were absolutely correct.
Show me these terms IN THE CONTRACT. Anything less makes the contract null and void for lack of full disclosure.
Well, the Supreme Court referenced the Preamble. But they could have easily referenced Article I and Aticle IV. States are created only with the permission of the existing states. Once admitted, they cannot combine, separate, change their borders a fraction of an inch without the permission of the other states. Implied in all that is the permission to leave.
No, as the other states were still free to go or stay at their discretion, and there was nothing to prevent the United States from petitioning the seceeding states for repayment.
And nothing to make those states pay, either. They walked away, they're independent. They have no obligations with the old country. So in your world some states are more equal than others. They can walk away from any and every obligation, leaving the remaining states to shoulder the burden. They can take steps detrimental to the interests of other states, steps that they cannot take under the Constitution but which you believe they can do simply by walking away. Show me where in the Constitution that is allowed.
You are ridiculous. The Constitution imposes restrictions on the federal government NOT the States.
Just as man gave a CERTAIN amount of authority to the civil 'state' to be a part of society, so the States gave a CERTAIN amount of authority to the statutory United States to be part of the Union.
Relinquishing a CERTAIN amount of authority is not the same as giving carte blanch to dictate whatever it chooses.
THAT'S the kind of thinking that bred the out of control government we suffer under today.
-----
As far as the Supreme Court goes, the die hard FEDERALIST James Madison:
Report on the Virginia Resolutions
However true, therefore, it may be, that the judicial department is, in all questions submitted to it by the forms of the Constitution, to decide in the last resort, this resort must necessarily be deemed the last in relation to the authorities of the other departments of the government; not in relation to the rights of the parties to the constitutional compact, from which the judicial, as well as the other departments, hold their delegated trusts. On any other hypothesis, the delegation of judicial power would annul the authority delegating it; and the concurrence of this department with the others in usurped powers, might subvert forever, and beyond the possible reach of any rightful remedy, the very Constitution which all were instituted to preserve.
-----
Goodbye