What you won't get any of the framers to say is that unilateral secession is disallowed by the Constitution OR in U.S. law.
You can't seem to even find anyone who gainsaid Jay and Wilson's statements that I quote above. No one was denying the primacy of the federal government in the 1790's. No one did-- until Calhoun made up the ideas of nullificatiion and secession from whole cloth.
Walt, the 11th Amendment OVERTURNED/NEGATED the specious decision against state sovereignty. An amendment to the Constitution addressed the issue of sovereignty, by stating that the "Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State."
The stateS overturned the decision, in and of itself proving that the Federal government/Supreme Court is not supreme, and that the states remain individual entities, retaining all sovereign rights not delegated.
You know that is false.
"The words of the Constitution are explicit that the Constitution & laws of the U. S. shall be supreme over the Constitution and laws of the several States; supreme in their exposition and execution as well as in their authority. Without a supremacy in those respects it would be like a scabbard in the hands of a soldier without a sword in it. The imagination itself is startled at the idea of twenty four independent expounders of a rule that cannot exist, but in a meaning and operation, the same for all."
Why would you tell a big lie like that?
And what about John Marshall?
"The mischievous consequences of the construction contended for on the part of Virginia, are also entitled to great consideration. It would prostrate, it has been said, the government and its laws at the feet of every state in the Union. And would this not be the effect? What power of the government could be executed by its own means, in any states disposed to resist its execution by a course of legislation?...each member will possess a veto on the will of the whole...there is certainly nothing in the circumstances under which our constitution was formed; nothing in the history of the times, which justify the opinion that the confidence reposed in the states was so implicit as to leave in them and their tribunals the power of resisting or defeating, in the form of law, the legislative measures of the Union..."
Big lies won't win the day.
Walt
Not even implicitly. What a joke.
Walt