Approved by a seceding portion of the Virginia Legislature? Not the whole body of the Virginia Legislature? That part not engaged in rebellion against the U.S., yes.
Don't you appologists keep telling us that acts by seceding authorities are null and void without the consent of the rest of the body?
They could have given their consent or withheld their consent as the case may be, except that they were off rebelling and all.
I guess secession is okay just when it supports what you want, eh?
I'm not at all surprised that you could come to that conclusion. I would just point out that the Supreme Court recognized the legality of the creation of West Virginia when they ruled in the case of Virginia v. West Virginia (78 U.S. 39) in 1871.
That part not engaged in rebellion against the U.S., yes. So if it had only been one, you would have accepted the decision of this newly constituted monarchy?
You really do have flexible principles, don't you? :)
I'm not at all surprised that you could come to that conclusion. I would just point out that the Supreme Court recognized the legality of the creation of West Virginia when they ruled in the case of Virginia v. West Virginia (78 U.S. 39) in 1871.
Yeah they ruled in favor of "gay marriage" too. They simply rule along the lines whatever party appointed them wants them to rule.
The 1871 Supreme court was just a bunch of Sock puppets for official federal policy and part of the effort to justify what they had done.
(1871 Supreme Court sock puppets depicted below.)
