First off, selling the furniture out of the White House isn't explicitly forbidden in the Constitution. Does that mean the president can do it?
By your lights, secession is allowed because it is not specifically forbidden. Suspending the writ by the president is disallowed because it is not specifically made reference to. It is a double standard. It costs you all your credibility.
Now, lest you cite Article 1 sec. 9 -- THAT applies to the Congress, not the president, per you.
The Constitution nowhere specifically says a word about what the President may do about the Writ. You are two faced, unless you will admit that other implied things -- like secession -- are forbidden too.
Walt
No Walt. My position is that secession is allowed because the act of preventing it would require coercion and such coercion is unconstitutional.
Suspending the writ by the president is disallowed because it is not specifically made reference to.
No Walt. It isn't allowed because in no reasonable way is there anything to even remotely suggest that the constitution permits that power with anything other than the legislature. Try again.
Nonsense. Secession is the act of a state, exercising reserved powers (that part if the Constitution you overlook). The suspension is a delegated power to the legislative branch, not to the executive. Your reading and understanding is just as bad as Lincoln's - besides co-mingling powers, your version has the federal goverment possessing all powers not prohibited to the states - not what the 10th states.