- Thread starter
- #21
The court case mentioned here is hooey. Yes, the court rules that the association with the union is permanent, but has the weakest of weak reasoning behind it -- indeed, this ruling is nothing but another form of 'force', with the result of the decision having been determined, and then an argument formed around it.
If I were arguing for TX, I would ask:
-Where is the Article I section 9 prohibition against secession?
-Absent same, how is secession not a right retained by the states under the 10th?
-Where does the Constitution specifically state that the association between the states, the other states, and the Federal government exist in perpituity?
Agreed...