Ah, but does each person have the right to dissolve the partnership on their own? A more accurate analogy would be a company with 50 partners. New partners are added only with the approval of the existing partners. Since all partners have a stake in the overall corporation, then shouldn't they have all have say if the partnership is to be dissolved and their own interest impacted?
There is no language in the Constitution forbidding secession. There is no statute on the books passed by Congress forbidding secession.
There is no language in the Constitution allowing an individual state to tresspass on the interests of any other state, and a lot of language specifically disallowing it. Why should states be allowed to harm other states merely by leaving? Shouldn't the remaining states have a say in their own interests?
That pesky 10th Amendment thingy that the Feeds seems so hell-bent to trample!
The Constitution is not a club that allows one state to beat up on the other states merely by leaving.
I never said it was a club. It is a partnership and agreement between the States to crate a Union of States.
The 10th Amendment was added by the Founding Fathers to protect the States from the Federal government.
Your analogy is wonderful. But if there are 50 partners and one or two leave ... the partnership still exists with the rest. There for the partnership and the individual partners are not harmed. They still survive.
As I said there is no law prohibiting secession. You have chosen the language basically of interstate commerce. It does not in any way, shape or form address secession.
What is one states’ interest in another state? What interest is it of one state what another state does? You imply that the governor of one state can dictate to the governor of another. Untrue.
One state leaving the Union is not beating up another state. There is no physical or economic damage. Commerce can continue.
Your argument doesn’t hold water. All you’re saying is that the Federal government is now omnipotent and omnipresent and must be followed no matter what.
It’s the Federal interest you are proclaiming, camouflaging it in another States’ interest. It doesn’t wash. You have shown no consideration for the rights of the individual States in what you have written and I have read. But the 10th Amendment does.
We are a government and a society of laws. Those laws mean what they are intended to curb or enforce. With the courts chiming in when questions arise.
As I said the Constitution nor any other law prohibits secession. No court decision has decided this issue, to date.
The Federal government holds jurisdiction in certain issues and the States in other issues. Both are sovereign in their own right.
Therefore it is legal for a State to secede if it chooses to do so. Until a law is passed or court decision opines differently.