View single post by Shadowrebel
 Posted: Tue Apr 25th, 2006 02:26 am
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
Shadowrebel
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 13th, 2005
Location: Old Forge, Pennsylvania USA
Posts: 71
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

David,

Thank you for your post. I agree that if you are going to use rebellion to make change you had better win. I think we are using different thinking concerning this issue. I think 1861 and back while I think others (correct me if I am wrong that you are one of them) here think modern day when we deal with this issue. Before the war the states had more power then the federal govt. During and after the war the federal govt. took power they did not have a right to. When the Constitution was accepted the states granted the federal govt. it's power with the states all stating that they could take back their power from the federal govt. when ever they felt it neccessary. This is where they get their right of secession.

As to Jones County: The states formed the federal govt. by giving it certian powers with only land donated by Maryland and Virginia (this was returned to Virginia in 1846) comprising it's land. A state in one form or another charters a county, town, city, or any other local govt. to use their land by the local people without giving up the right to the land. Therefore, when a state wants to leave the Union it is only taking back the powers it gave the federal govt. and no land. When a chartered portion of a state wants to secede from a state it wants to take land it has not right to. That is the difference between states leaving the Union and a portion of a state leaving a state. This is how Mississippi could stop Jones County from leaving the state.  Can New York City leave the State of New York to join Pennsylvania?

The federal govt. can not make a state leave the Union because the states formed the federal govt. by giving it it's powers. A state by it's forming the federal govt. by a compact with the other states and approval of the Constitution with conditions attached, one of which was the right to take back it's powers when it felt it necessary to do so. The 10th amendment was written to prevent the new govt. from taking powers it had no right to take, which is why it is written the way it is.

Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Note well this. Anything not expressly granted to the Federal government is reserved for the States or the People. Although this amendment is very liberally interpreted, it is one of the tenets of the Constitution. This amendment is also known as the States' Rights Amendment.

Since secession was not mentioned in the Constitution anywhere it remains a state right, it did not need to be addressed in the Constitution since the states only appoved the Constitution with the right to take back it's power granted the federal government. I feel this gives them to legal right to secede since the Constitution was approved with the condition of taking back states powers.

I see nothing in this that indicates that is was written to stop a state from leaving the Union or impacting the Union in any way or to make sure they ran their internal affairs properly and uninhibited.

Sincerely

John

 Close Window