So what you are saying is that the state legislatures weren't required to obey supreme court decisions?
The state supreme courts could not say "send our people home."
In your world, the state supreme court had the authority to decide what acts of the confederate congress were constitutional and what were not. So if a state supreme court ruled that the Davis regime could not draft the men of their state then wouldn't that mean that those men already drafted would have to be discharged? And what power did the states have to compel that? And if the men of Texas were not subject to conscription then why should the men of Louisiana or Georgia?
No. They'd be required to obey state supreme court decisions. I am simply saying that it would be virtually impossible for a case to arise in which the decision of whether or not to deploy the militia or how to use that militia was put into the court's hands.
In your world, the state supreme court had the authority to decide what acts of the confederate congress were constitutional and what were not.
Not in my world, non-seq. That is actually what happened in the CSA.
So if a state supreme court ruled that the Davis regime could not draft the men of their state then wouldn't that mean that those men already drafted would have to be discharged?
Not if the case arose before their incorporation into the federal armies. That is at least what happened with the texas case, which sought to draft the state militia into the federal regulars.
And what power did the states have to compel that?
The power to order their militia not to go where Davis told them.
And if the men of Texas were not subject to conscription then why should the men of Louisiana or Georgia?
Because Louisiana and Georgia are different states with different political processes and policies.