Not legally no, but the whole problem with democracy is its tendency towards absolute majoritarianism. After all, since the Constitution was authorized by delegates representing a majority and thus drawing its power and authority from the people, there is no philosophical bar to dissolving it if the people so chose. There is a fatal flaw in the system which justifies itself on a philosophical principle incongruent with the power of its legal apparati. And not to put to fine a point on it, but resistance to the forced will of a majority, even an small majority, was the proclaimed reason for the Souths secession. Compulsory democracy is evil, since it is inherently inimical to liberty. Thus the only protection against majoritarianiusm and all the evils that flow from it, is the principal of free democracy; that is voluntary democracy. Voluntary, but absolute unanimity is a medieval idea attached to medieval notions of democracy, but it's also the only just form of democracy. Compulsory democracy has no more justification for being than the worst form of tyranny.
How can a government, deriving its authority from the consent of the people, philosophically justify the forced compulsion of the people against their consent? If the Constitution does not draw its authority from the people, from where does it come?
Explain again to me "the forced will of majority" that drove the south to secede? It was the election of Lincoln that drove them out and he hadn't taken office or had a chance to force his will on anyone when they seceded.