There is no evidence that they even seriously discussed it.
and I will repeat that Madison’s views about this which he expressed decades after ratification are not relevant.
Not to you at least. But I'll refer you, yet again, to his letter to Hamilton.
No they did not relinquish their right to decide on their own form of government. The Constitution merely stated that a state must have a republican form of government.
So no monarchy? No benevolent despotism? No parliamentarian form? Even if the state wanted one? How sovereign of them.
State Judiciaries were very much supreme. Remember that the federal courts are courts of limited subject mater jurisdiction.
But still supreme over state or local courts in matters that fall under their jurisdiction. And don't forget that federal law is supreme if and when state or local laws conflict with it. Subordinate to the federal government.
No they did not give up “every other power that makes a sovereign country a sovereign country.
They certainly did.
A 1 minute google search turned up a 1996 ruling in which the US Supreme Court affirmed once again that states are sovereign. Seminole Tribe of Florida v. State of Florida,
Next time spend more than a minute on your search. Or at least read the decision.
Let’s see.....the power to prevent secession was NOT DELEGATED (notice the word delegated?) to the Uninted States. Therefore it is RESERVED to the states. Your argument of an implied grant of power to the US is null and void.
The power to prevent it is implied in Article I and Article IV. You can continue to repeat your nonsense about not specifically being prohibited and I'll repeat my contention that it is implied. We can do this all night.
That is literally the only word that is different from the test as you would have it. The burden of proof that this power was given to the federal government lies with those who would claim it was - ie you - not with the states which had this power from the start.
And I've given my evidence time and time again.
There is no evidence that they even seriously discussed it.
The Northern Federalists’ Hartford Convention declared in 1814 that a state had the right to secede in cases of “absolute necessity” (Alan Brinkley, Richard Current, Frank Freidel, and T. Harry Williams, American History: A Survey, Eighth Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1991, p. 230).
and I’ll refer you to the Federalist #45
...The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.
and the Federalist #46
the powers proposed to be lodged in the federal government are as little formidable to those reserved to the individual States
its hilarious watching you continue to try to argue the states were not sovereign once they ratified the constitution in the face of Madison, Hamilton, the wording of the constitution, the express reservations of the states and multiple decisions of the US Supreme Court that they are sovereign.
I’ve already shown you that you are wrong about this multiple times.
No need to. The case and the ruling of the Supreme Court proved you WRONG.
Repeating your BS does not make it any less BS. The 10th amendment makes it clear that a power not delegated to the federal government was reserved to the states. Nowhere does it say this power was delegated. I’m perfectly content to continue this all night and all the next day...hell all year. Fine with me. I enjoy this.
and I’ve proven you wrong time and time again.