Replies

>> It's folly to think that the Constitution contains an implicit right to break the Constitution.

Article 1 Section 8, and Article 1 Section 9 of the constitution enumerates specific powers and prohibitions for the general government and the states. It provides NO specific power to the general government to prevent secession, nor does it specifically prohibit the states from seceding. Therefore, according to the 10th Amendment, that power rests with the states.

While it is true that Article I does not prohibit secession, Articles IV, VI and VII have several clauses that seem incompatible with secession. They read (emphasis mine):

Article. IV.
Section. 1.
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
Section. 2.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.
No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.
Section. 3.
New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.
Section. 4.
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.
Article. VI.
All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Article. VII.
The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.

The supremacy clause makes the Constitution and federal law the supreme law of the land. Barring an explicit provision in the constitution, no state can exempt itself from the Constitution and laws of the United States. This doesn't mean some dissolution of the union is impossible, just that it can't be unilateral. The representatives of the whole country have to be involved.

This debate has been going on a long time, and other people are more expert and interested in these questions than I am. One thing I have noticed is how much Confederate types ignore the explosive situation of the times. It was a very chaotic time. The air was charged with thoughts of war and revolution, and we're told now that things were much more calm and peaceful than they were. The secessionists were hardly peace-loving petitioners for the redress of grievances. They flirted with war and, in Davis's case, embraced it.

The recklessness of Southern leaders might have been excused if there was a real threat of tyranny at the time. Had they acted more prudentially they might have achieved their goals without war, though the realization of their aims would hardly have been something praiseworthy either.

The fact that things have gone wrong since 1865 has been used to justify the rebellion, but it's not enough to whitewash the secessionists. Neither their aims nor their means were particularly laudable.