Yes, it did-- after the war. Perhaps the clearest statement is in
the case Texas v. White (74 U.S. 700). Chief Justice Chase, writing
for the court in its 1869 decision, said:
"The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible
Union, composed of indestructible States. ... Considered, therefore, as
transactions under the Constitution, the Ordinance of Secession, adopted
by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and
all the Acts of her Legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance,
were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. ... Our
conclusion, therefore, is, that Texas continued to be a State, and a State
of the Union, notwithstanding the transactions to which we have referred."
The entire decision is available on the Web at
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/cases/historic.htm
the TRUTH is that TX v. White, like the Dredd Scott, Plessy v. Fergurson & Roe v. Wade are DECISIONS of the USSC, which (on their face) are UN-Constitutional.
it's called MAKING NEW LAW, rather than INTERPRETING the Constitution. also, TX v White was AFTER the WBTS, thus it has NO validity for the 1861-65 period.
free dixie,sw
See: Texas v. White, an ipse dixit decision (asserted but not proved)
The 1788 New York Ratification Convention had this to say about what the Constitution meant to them (Source):
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New York; July 26, 1788.
(1) WE the Delegates of the People of the State of New York, duly elected and Met in Convention, having maturely considered the Constitution for the United States of America, agreed to on the seventeenth day of September, in the year One thousand Seven hundred and Eighty seven, by the Convention then assembled at Philadelphia in the Common-wealth of Pennsylvania (a Copy whereof precedes these presents) and having also seriously and deliberately considered the present situation of the United States, Do declare and make known. ...
That the Powers of Government may be reassumed by the People, whensoever it shall become necessary to their Happiness; ...
... Under these impressions and declaring that the rights aforesaid cannot be abridged or violated, and that the Explanations aforesaid are consistent with the said Constitution ... We the said Delegates, in the Name and in the behalf of the People of the State of New York Do by these presents Assent to and Ratify the said Constitution.
With respect, I trust the opinion of those guys as to what the Constitution means concerning states resuming their own governance over that of Chief Justice Chase, a member of Lincoln's cabinet who had been committed during the war to blocking states from resuming their own governance.