I don't know any such thing and you don't either; who are you trying to fool?
The supremacy clause clearly states that the Constitution and the laws made in pursuance are the supreme laws of the land.
Do you give the lurkers so little credit, that they don't know how the clause reads?
And men have to administer the document. And someone, or group of people, have to have the final say. That group of people is the Supreme Court. It's a real document, made for real situations.
That is what you neo-rebs deny, and that is why your argument is SO lame.
Walt
I'm sure lurkers wait with baited breath for every word that flies from you fingers. But if you haven't been following the thread, a certain poster who holds the opinion that "pursuant" is nit-picking.
And men have to administer the document. And someone, or group of people, have to have the final say. That group of people is the Supreme Court. It's a real document, made for real situations.
Then file suit if you disagree.
That is what you neo-rebs deny, and that is why your argument is SO lame.
Article IV REQUIRES that the public acts of the states be accepted by the others. The federal government did have the ability to prescibe the rules of what was acceptible, and they did in 1790. And accordingly, under those provisions, the Declarations of Seccesion are valid. The states had seceded according to the rules, fair and square.
That is what you neo-cons deny, and that is why your argument is SO lame.