Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Non-Sequitur
So if the Constitution gives Congress the power to admit states in the first place and to approve any change in their status or border once they're in then I don't think it's any real stretch to conclude that Congressional approval is needed for them to leave.

But I note that you don't address why the Framers mysteriously chose to remain silent on this issue when they had spoken loud and clear in the Articles. Assuming, arguendo, that "it's not a stretch to conclude" that Congressional approval is needed for secession, what possible reason would the Framers have for not explicitly stating that states did not have the power to secede? After all, as you stated, the Framers made a laundry list of powers vis-a-vis state admission, division, and borders. Why would they go silent on secession?

233 posted on 08/28/2007 12:21:41 PM PDT by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies ]


To: Publius Valerius
After all, as you stated, the Framers made a laundry list of powers vis-a-vis state admission, division, and borders. Why would they go silent on secession?

I don't know, but nothing says that those were the sole powers. If Marshall is correct and interpretations must be made based on a broad reading of the entire Constitution then it makes more sense to think the authors of the Constitution would explicitly state the exceptions rather than leave them to be assumed.

237 posted on 08/28/2007 12:32:53 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson