“Article 4.”
It seems that you just can’t admit the difference between what the Constitution says and how you interpret it. Article 4 says what it says, not what you want it to say.
“LOL The judgment capabilities of a reb sympathizer on display for all to see. You would have let California seize our ability to fight WW2. Unbelievable.”
Now you’re trying to place the words you want me to have said in my mouth, so that you can denounce me. I didn’t say I would “let” California do anything. I only said that they would have the right to secede at that time, just like any other state at any other time. The fact that you framed the question to try and color judgement with emotion doesn’t change the fact that the question must be answered based on principles rather than emotion.
It says Congress has the right to prescribe the manner in which a state proves its acts. Secession is an act.
Now you’re trying to place the words you want me to have said in my mouth, so that you can denounce me. I didn’t say I would “let” California do anything. I only said that they would have the right to secede at that time, just like any other state at any other time. The fact that you framed the question to try and color judgement with emotion doesn’t change the fact that the question must be answered based on principles rather than emotion.
Emotion has nothing to do with it. You said California would have the right to confiscate our federal warmaking ability on Dec 8, 1941.