Replies

Unless you have some evidence to support your claim, then yes.

LMAO! He was a member of the Lincoln administration. As Chief Justice he held his own actions as Treasury Secretary to be just fine and dandy. *slight* conflict of interest there. Even you can’t believe the BS you’re trying to peddle here.

If you are going to claim that Chase was biased without even reading the Texas v. White decision they you are just weakening your case. Because it you had read the decision you would know that Chase never said secession was illegal.

Obviously I’ve read his laughable opinion

I’ve been going back and forth with you all afternoon and as near as I can tell you position is no legalities of any kind enters into it.

Foreign powers weren’t interested in legality - only a Realpolitik calculation of their own interests as always. Obviously the Lincoln administration wasn’t concerned with legality either since it acted in unconstitutional fashion numerous times

They surrendered every power that made a state the sovereign nation you claim that they are.

They did not. Madison and Hamilton said they were not doing so. The states themselves said they were not doing so. The US Supreme Court has ruled right up to the present generation that they are sovereign and thus did not surrender all of their sovereign powers yet you claim in the face of all of that evidence that they did. That is truly amazing.

“This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”

The treaty making power. Yes. So what?

For example?

For example the 1996 US SUpreme Court case I already referenced. Seminole Tribe of Florida v. State of Florida, 116 S. Ct. 1114 (1996). In Seminole, the Court held that, in light of the “background principle” of sovereign immunity that underlay the Eleventh Amendment, Congress has no power under the Commerce Clauses of Article I of the Constitution to subject the States to citizen suits in federal court without their consent.

https://fedsoc.org/commentary/publications/supreme-court-reaffirms-state-sovereignty

They relinquished their sovereignty over anything that happened outside of their state borders and a lot of went on within them.

Not all. For example among the many others, they reserved the right to secede.

“We, the delegates of the people of Virginia, duly elected in pursuance of a recommendation from the general assembly, and now met in convention, having fully and freely investigated and discussed the proceedings of the Federal Convention, and being prepared as well as the most mature deliberation hath enabled us to decide thereon, Do, in the name and in behalf of the people of Virginia, declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression, and that every power not granted thereby remains with them and at their will....”

“We, the delegates of the people of New York... do declare and make known that the powers of government may be reassumed by the people whenever it shall become necessary to their happiness; that every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not by the said Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or the department of the government thereof, remains to the people of the several States, or to their respective State governments, to whom they may have granted the same; and that those clauses in the said Constitution, which declare that Congress shall not have or exercise certain powers, do not imply that Congress is entitled to any powers not given by the said Constitution; but such clauses are to be construed either as exceptions in certain specified powers or as inserted merely for greater caution.”

“We, the delegates of the people of Rhode Island and Plantations, duly elected... do declare and make known... that the powers of government may be resumed by the people whenever it shall become necessary to their happiness; that every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not by the said Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or the department of the government thereof, remains to the people of the several States, or to their respective State governments, to whom they may have granted the same; that Congress shall guarantee to each State its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Constitution expressly delegated to the United States.”

So in other words, other than your opinion you've got nothing? As I suspected.

Obviously I’ve read his laughable opinion

I haven't seen much evidence that you have.

Obviously the Lincoln administration wasn’t concerned with legality either since it acted in unconstitutional fashion numerous times

For example?

They did not.

They did indeed.

The treaty making power. Yes. So what?

Breezed right by the "laws made under it" part I see.

Not all. For example among the many others, they reserved the right to secede.

No they didn't.