Replies

Since the CSA set aside the constitution, they were an insurrection, therefore the Union was only exercising the power inherent in the constitution. By denying that the constitution had any power over them (every CSA state did this), they were in open rebellion.

The US Supreme Court ruled in 1862 that the "so-called confederate states" (their phrase) were in rebellion and that under acts passed on 1795 and 1807 (passed in pursuance of the Constitution don't you know) the government was empowered to put down that rebellion.

The neo-rebs are not like Monty's Python's Black Knight. They are not like the Emperor with no clothes. They are like the Black Knight with no clothes.

Walt

The neo-rebs are not like Monty's Python's Black Knight. They are not like the Emperor with no clothes. They are like the Black Knight with no clothes.

I admit to a certain amount of frustration because there seems to be a tendency amongst a certain set to ignore the fact that not only are there states' rights and powers, there are also federal rights and powers. Between Articles I and VI and the 9th and 10th amendments it is quite clear that sovereignty for the Union is vested in the constitution and delegated to the federal government.

Too many seem to want to pick and choose what they want in the constitution. I'm afraid that this is perilously close to the "living document theory" that I so abhor.

Personally, I take a fundamentalist view of the constitution.