To: tdewey10
“There is no provision for leaving the Union. Once the states agreed to join they were stuck for better or worse.”
The second statement does not follow from the first.
One simplistic but fair reading would be that since there is no provision for leaving the Union, and since all authority not specifically granted to the federal government is retained by the various States, then the States retain the right to leave the Union.
15 posted on
08/27/2007 2:02:07 PM PDT by
swain_forkbeard
(Rationality may not be sufficient, but it is necessary.)
To: swain_forkbeard
One simplistic but fair reading would be that since there is no provision for leaving the Union, and since all authority not specifically granted to the federal government is retained by the various States, then the States retain the right to leave the Union. States did not have the right to unilaterally join the Union, how could the retain a right to unilaterally leave?
18 posted on
08/27/2007 2:03:55 PM PDT by
Non-Sequitur
(Save Fredericks-burg. Support CVBT.)
To: swain_forkbeard
One simplistic but fair reading would be that since there is no provision for leaving the Union, and since all authority not specifically granted to the federal government is retained by the various States, then the States retain the right to leave the Union.
This especially makes sense when you consider that a state is bound to the Union by its ratification of the Consitution by its state legislature. Nothing anywhere says that ratification can't be revoked by that same legislature.
30 posted on
08/27/2007 2:14:45 PM PDT by
JamesP81
(Keep your friends close; keep your enemies at optimal engagement range)
To: swain_forkbeard
47 posted on
08/27/2007 2:38:31 PM PDT by
stand watie
("Resistance to tyrants is OBEDIENCE to God." - T. Jefferson, 1804)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson