[Lee'sGhost]

"Then a court made up of justices from other states would have been just as biased?"

Of course. What do you think the ruling would have been if all the justices were from the South?

"What have you offered except your own opinion?"

Ohhhhhh, that explains it. You confuse opinion with irrefutable logic.

[Non-Sequitur]

Of course. What do you think the ruling would have been if all the justices were from the South?

So you honestly believe that the Supreme Court was incapable of making an impartial decision in this matter? A court heavy on Northern judges would automatically rule against the legality of secession while a court heavy on southern judges would automatically rule for it. I'm not sure how to refute 'irrefutable logic' like that. If you want to consider Texas v White to be hopelessly biased then that's your right. It still doesn't change the fact that it was a valid decision and remains one until a future court modifies the decision or until the Constitution is amended. Until that time secession as practiced by the southern states is illegal. That's irrefutable.