“The constitutional and legal status of the Declaration of Independence is curiously ambiguous. John Hancock (in his capacity as president of the Second Continental Congress) and James Madison both considered it to be, in Madison's words, “the fundamental Act of Union of these States.” Reflecting that view, congress has placed it at THE HEAD OF THE UNITED STATES CODE, UNDER THE CAPTION, “THE ORGANIC LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.”
The Supreme Court has infrequently accorded it binding legal force, for example, in resolving questions of alienage (Inglis v. Trustees of Sailor's Snug Harbour, 1830). Yet lawyers generally, and the Supreme Court in particular, have been reluctant to treat the Declaration as part of American organic law, or even to accord it the restricted status of the Preamble to the Constitution. Conservatives like Daniel Webster denied that there is a constitutionally recognized right of revolution, and those state supreme courts that have addressed the issue in the twentieth century have adopted Webster's view. Reformers, such as antebellum abolitionists, insisted that the Declaration was part of the constitutional order, while their opponents, including John C. Calhoun, denigrated its authority and validity. The adoption of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments allayed the urgency of that question by incorporating concepts of equality, freedom, and citizenship into the operative constitutional text.
Nevertheless, the Declaration of Independence endures as the basic statement of the principles of American government. Abraham Lincoln invoked its authority in the supreme crisis of the union, and it remains today the foundation of our constitutional order.”
(end quote)
In 1897, the SCOTUS declared:
“The latter [Constitution] is but the body and letter of which the former [Declaration of Independence] is the thought and spirit, and it is always safe to read the letter of the Constitution in the spirit of the Declaration of independence.”
I hope you are satisfied with this, NS. If not, sorry; I will not play the nitpicking games you like to engage in on this forum.
“Nevertheless, the Declaration of Independence endures as the basic statement of the principles of American government. Abraham Lincoln invoked its authority in the supreme crisis of the union, and it remains today the foundation of our constitutional order.”
I find that humorous. President Lincoln trampled all over the Constitution is order to protect it. He violated the intent of the Declaration when he used force to keep the South from succeeding because they no longer “consented” to the government as it had evolved.
You can’t have it both ways. President Lincoln denied Southern States the right to do what the Declaration indicated. And we are told he “evoked” it to justify this action?
It seems to me that the Civil War ended the question of a 2nd Revolution being possible. But now we have person advocating violating the constitution in order to remove a sitting POTUS.
Hey, I don’t care for President Obama and his leaving office as soon as legally possible is a great thing to me. However, I will not be part of a coup....that is what some here are advocating. What persons should be doing is supporting folks like LTC Lakin instead. Folks we just don’t have the time to deal with even minor insurrection in the ranks that could lead to violent actions against an administration. Once we go down that road, there is no stopping it in the future....even with a good POTUS.