Yes, why not? Given that the concept of states rights was paid at least lip service by Jefferson Davis then why shouldn't the local states have the right to limit slavery if they chose to do so? The Constitution did not expressly protect slavery so there is no reason why it could not be limited by local governments.
I think there was a Harvard law professor after the war who argued that the South was correct constitutionally.
There have been professors before, during, and after the war that have argued the southern actions were legal. There have been others that have argued the southern actions were not. The only time it came before the Supreme Court secession was ruled illegal. But the debate goes on.
Yes, I realized some might argue this. Does the concept of states rights apply only to the North?
If slavery is recognized in the Constitution, how could the 10th Amendment be used to say that some states can prohibit slavery?