[arrogantsob]

“Local men” does not equate to “militia”. If the Vice Lords tried to take possession of my house, I suppose you would say that it was the Chicago Militia. Slaver forces did not engage in battle until months had passed after Slaver forces attacked Sumter.

The entire definition of “constitution” makes secession illegal. It isn't an arbitrary law established in a unilaterally revocable manner such as an Islamic marriage.
No state can take back its ratification outside of a Constitutional amendment.

Ft. Sumter was not vacant when attacked by the Slaver forces. It was occupied federal property. Slaver revolutionaries had for weeks been seizing federal arms and properties all over the South treasonously placed in their grasp by secessionist traitors within Buchanan's cabinet. Lincoln, wisely and rightly, made sure that did not happen to Sumter.

[PeaRidge]

You said: "The entire definition of “constitution” makes secession illegal. It isn't an arbitrary law established in a unilaterally revocable manner such as an Islamic marriage. No state can take back its ratification outside of a Constitutional amendment."

I think that phrase sums up your argument. And I would add that it represents your thinking only. It is your concept of the Constitution only. It does not reflect the thinking or law of the time.

You are wrong to perfection. At the time of secession, the Executive, the legislative, and the judiciary all agreed that secession was not prohibited by law.