[Non-Sequitur]

That the states are not prohibited from seceeding is a fact based on a reading of the document itself...

Based on your reading of the document. You have no more to support your position than you claim I have to support mine. Your opinion that the Supreme Court failed to clarify their position to your satisfaction is meaningless, and Texas v White is still a valid decision. Ignore it if you wish, it doesn't change the fact that it was a valid decision and that unilateral secession as practiced by the southern states is illegal.

[Gianni]

Ignore it if you wish, it doesn't change the fact that it was a valid decision and that unilateral secession as practiced by the southern states is illegal.

Always to the crux of your argument, validity is defined by men with guns standing by to enforce it. Whether or not it was consistent with the Constitution and the laws at the time is meaningless.

[HenryLeeII]

What you are saying is that a baseless, indefensible Supreme Court decision is a valid way of settling debates regarding the Constitution, as long as the U.S. Army is used to crush the opposition? Wow! I thought this was America, not some third-world banana republic!