[4CJ]

"... the Union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State."
Articles of Confederation, Article XIII. A legal, binding document that required every state - every state - to agree to changes. But with the new Constitution, a decision by only 9 of those same states for ratification, which was not all of the states that were in the Confederation, would dissolve the AoC and form a new government for those 9 states. So much for a "perpetual" union.

The historical record (Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation etc.) are abundantly clear that indeed, a right to secession existed. If you're so against it Walt, you can always renounce American citizenship, and swear allegiance to Great Britain.

[Non-Sequitur]

I don't think that it is correct to assume that the founders meant for it to be impossible for a single state or states to sever their relationship with the country. The Constitution is a compact and can be amended. Since ending the compact is certainly an amendment to it then the means for secession is found in Article V. Had the south followed the Constitution and gotten the backing of 2/3rds of the total number of states - not an impossible task - then they would be free today. Since the Constitution does not give any state the right to arbitrarily decide what part it will abide to and what part it will not then nothing in it could reasonably be construed to allow for arbitrary secession. That was the path the south took and that path was illegal.

[WhiskeyPapa]

The historical record (Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation etc.) are abundantly clear that indeed, a right to secession existed.

That right, clearly, does NOT exist under the Constitution.

Walt