That is incorrect. As was pointed out here previously, Vermont was denied admission to the Union until it settled a land dispute with New York. Try again.
Chief Justice Chase later said, 'by the Constitution, secession is not rebellion.'
Meaningless and out of context.
Cases are filed by the injured party, not one seeking permission.
More meaningless drivel. It is actually quite easy to establish a precedent for the court to decide [Roe v. Wade is one example]. Prior to seceding Federal representatives of the Southern states acting on behalf of the nation as a whole could have petitioned the courts for approval of the project. Secession (imo) would have probably would have met with the courts approval and proceeded amicably and fairly without the bloodshed brought on by the South.
The 14th does not apply (post bellum).
No one said anything about the 14th amendment, so stop bringing it up. Article IV Section 2 clearly states: "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States". How does Secession proceed [legally] without trampling on the rights of the citizens who do not wish to depart from the Union?
By your reasoning the states could not deprive Tories of their British citizenship but they did.
Once again you confuse the concept of legal Secession with Revolution. I've already asked you to 'man up' about the realities of what happened in 1860. Are you prepared to do so now?
Until you can point to a clause prohibiting secession, it's you that must must admit to waging a war of northern aggression.
I have already considered the possibility that the US Constitution would allow legal secession to take place. I am couching my position that Secession in 1860 was illegal on the way the South left. They trampled over the rights of citizens, the courts, and the remaining States. Had they proceeded at a normal pace for such an endevour, I also have no doubt the Southern people would have rejected the Confederacy. The Secessionists knew they needed a war to rally the South, which is why they acted in the callous manner they did.
I moved next to several black families, I have black friends, they eat at our table, and swim in our pool with us and my children.
If I owned five acres I probably wouldn't have any trouble living next store to you either. Perhaps a more relevant question and one that gets to the core of the matter regarding the true nature of your relationship would be, do you pray together in church?
Read my sentence again, ' In 1789, neither the President, congress, nor judiciary could decide whether or not a state ratified ...' The original states did not seek approval of anyone.
It is actually quite easy to establish a precedent for the court to decide [Roe v. Wade is one example]. Prior to seceding Federal representatives of the Southern states acting on behalf of the nation as a whole could have petitioned the courts for approval of the project.
RvW was a court case - filed by a petitioner with a respondent. If any state was harmed by the secession of a state, it was that state's responsibility to file suit. The court does not deliver advisory opinions!
Meaningless and out of context.
Nonsense, if Chief Justice Chase believed that secession was not rebellion, then there goes Lincoln's pretext for war, and that President Davis and the Confederacy had NOT commited treason. Meaning that Union had waged a war of aggression against innocents. Hardly meaningless and out of context.
"The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States". How does Secession proceed [legally] without trampling on the rights of the citizens who do not wish to depart from the Union?
The clause means that a state cannot discriminate against citizens of another state while said "foreign" citizen is domiciled there. It does NOT mean that the laws written in Massachussets are incorporated into Georgia law. Again, in a Constitutionally MANDATED republican form of government, the minority must acquiesce to the will of the majority (via representative rule).
Once again you confuse the concept of legal Secession with Revolution. I've already asked you to 'man up' about the realities of what happened in 1860. Are you prepared to do so now?
Above you state that IF the states begged for permission to leave, and IF the court assents, then secession would be legal. Those same people that you claim would be harmed by the alleged illegal secessions would again be disaffected by your alleged legal secession. As it was, Tories not wishing to join the union under the Articles were dragged in against their will, as were those against ratification in 1789. Ted "The Swimmer' Kennedy can't can't prevent passage of a bill by a 1-99 vote, nor can 1 state prevent an amendment, nor can 1 "unionist" in a state prevent secession. If the unionist doesn't want to stay then they can move. It's not a difficult concept.
They trampled over the rights of citizens, the courts, and the remaining States.
The people of New York do not vote in South Carolina. A citizen of New York could not sue South Carolina in court. The people of New York could not ratify for South Carolina. The Constitution mandates a republican (representative) form of government which all states possessed. New Yorkers do not vote on SC representatives or delegates, nor amend or abolish their form of government.
Had they proceeded at a normal pace for such an endevour ...
Where exactly does the Constitution enumerate the 'normal' pace for said event?
'I also have no doubt the Southern people would have rejected the Confederacy.'
That certainly explains those overwhelming votes FOR secession </sarcasm>
Perhaps a more relevant question and one that gets to the core of the matter regarding the true nature of your relationship would be, do you pray together in church?
Yep. In church, at work, and at home. A very good friend of ours was injured in a wreck, and hospitalized, we saw her often, took food to her, helped her and her kids. She is black. I changed tires for a lady at 1AM on my way home one night - she was black. I've given money to strangers and the homeless - black. We grew up with a man we called our brother then and still do, he's black.