Constitutional Convention?

[Centinel]

A third legal alternative would be for some number of states to exit the union and then establish a new treaty between themselves.

Provided that Congress ratifies such a departure, yes.

Sorry, the constitution contains no language requiring such a ratification.

Sorry, a civil war and a SCOTUS decision says you are obviously not a constitutional scholar. Run along.

Since you obviously ARE a constitutional scholar, perhaps you can point out the language in the constitution (you know, the supreme law of the land) that restricts a state from leaving the union.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A third legal alternative would be for some number of states to exit the union and then establish a new treaty between themselves.

Provided that Congress ratifies such a departure, yes.

Sorry, the constitution contains no language requiring such a ratification.

Sorry, a civil war and a SCOTUS decision says you are obviously not a constitutional scholar. Run along.

Since you obviously ARE a constitutional scholar, perhaps you can point out the language in the constitution (you know, the supreme law of the land) that restricts a state from leaving the union.

Show me where it is permitted. The question has been resolved. There will be no secession.

 

[Centinel]

A third legal alternative would be for some number of states to exit the union and then establish a new treaty between themselves.

Provided that Congress ratifies such a departure, yes.

Sorry, the constitution contains no language requiring such a ratification.

Sorry, a civil war and a SCOTUS decision says you are obviously not a constitutional scholar. Run along.

Since you obviously ARE a constitutional scholar, perhaps you can point out the language in the constitution (you know, the supreme law of the land) that restricts a state from leaving the union.

Show me where it is permitted. The question has been resolved. There will be no secession.

You don't seem to understand the nature of our constitution. Everything that is not forbidden to the several sovereign states is permitted.

The only restrictions upon the states are listed in article I, section 10. To wit:

1: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

2: No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

3: No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.​

I can't find any prohibition on a state leaving the union, can you?

 

[jon_berzerk]

the states can form their own convention

which disregards congress and the prezbo ta boot

Wrongo. Read it again.

are fucking stupid or just fucking plain stupid you readit again stupid

They can call it, they cannot form it.

To say the states can form one is to reveal a stupidity second only to steve_mcgarrett on the forum. You rank with shootspeeders, protectionist, kush, yurt, et al.

yes they can

dont be so ignorant

or,

on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes,

you as usual display your idiocy

 

[jon_berzerk]

A third legal alternative would be for some number of states to exit the union and then establish a new treaty between themselves.

Provided that Congress ratifies such a departure, yes.

Sorry, the constitution contains no language requiring such a ratification.

Sorry, a civil war and a SCOTUS decision says you are obviously not a constitutional scholar. Run along.

Since you obviously ARE a constitutional scholar, perhaps you can point out the language in the constitution (you know, the supreme law of the land) that restricts a state from leaving the union.

Show me where it is permitted. The question has been resolved. There will be no secession.

hey doo-fus

the Constitution is a limit on the federal government can do

not a permission paper for the states or the people

you libtards a funny bunch

 

[JakeStarkey]

the states can form their own convention

which disregards congress and the prezbo ta boot

Wrongo. Read it again.

are fucking stupid or just fucking plain stupid you readit again stupid

They can call it, they cannot form it.

To say the states can form one is to reveal a stupidity second only to steve_mcgarrett on the forum. You rank with shootspeeders, protectionist, kush, yurt, et al.

yes they can

dont be so ignorant

or,

on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes,

you as usual display your idiocy

The states can only call for it, nothing more.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Provided that Congress ratifies such a departure, yes.

Sorry, the constitution contains no language requiring such a ratification.

Sorry, a civil war and a SCOTUS decision says you are obviously not a constitutional scholar. Run along.

Since you obviously ARE a constitutional scholar, perhaps you can point out the language in the constitution (you know, the supreme law of the land) that restricts a state from leaving the union.

Show me where it is permitted. The question has been resolved. There will be no secession.

hey doo-fus

the Constitution is a limit on the federal government can do

not a permission paper for the states or the people

you libtards a funny bunch

Those you call 'libtards' follow the Constitution, you don't.

 

[jon_berzerk]

the states can form their own convention

which disregards congress and the prezbo ta boot

Wrongo. Read it again.

are fucking stupid or just fucking plain stupid you readit again stupid

They can call it, they cannot form it.

To say the states can form one is to reveal a stupidity second only to steve_mcgarrett on the forum. You rank with shootspeeders, protectionist, kush, yurt, et al.

yes they can

dont be so ignorant

or,

on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes,

you as usual display your idiocy

The states can only call for it, nothing more.

the paste i posted is from the Constitution jake

you are completely incorrect

i know you can not admit you are wrong

but you are

 

[JakeStarkey]

Wrongo. Read it again.

are fucking stupid or just fucking plain stupid you readit again stupid

They can call it, they cannot form it.

To say the states can form one is to reveal a stupidity second only to steve_mcgarrett on the forum. You rank with shootspeeders, protectionist, kush, yurt, et al.

yes they can

dont be so ignorant

or,

on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes,

you as usual display your idiocy

The states can only call for it, nothing more.

the paste i posted is from the Constitution jake

you are completely incorrect

i know you can not admit you are wrong

but you are

I can read as well as or better than you. I can also read commentary, SCOTUS opinions, and history. You have your opinion, and that is all well and good, but it means nothing. Congress would never allow the goobers from the far left and the far right and libertarian groups to come to a convention. Congress will never agree to call it.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Sorry, the constitution contains no language requiring such a ratification.

Sorry, a civil war and a SCOTUS decision says you are obviously not a constitutional scholar. Run along.

Since you obviously ARE a constitutional scholar, perhaps you can point out the language in the constitution (you know, the supreme law of the land) that restricts a state from leaving the union.

Show me where it is permitted. The question has been resolved. There will be no secession.

hey doo-fus

the Constitution is a limit on the federal government can do

not a permission paper for the states or the people

you libtards a funny bunch

Those you call 'libtards' follow the Constitution, you don't.

jake you are incorrect

you best go read the Constitution again

 

[jon_berzerk]

are fucking stupid or just fucking plain stupid you readit again stupid

They can call it, they cannot form it.

To say the states can form one is to reveal a stupidity second only to steve_mcgarrett on the forum. You rank with shootspeeders, protectionist, kush, yurt, et al.

yes they can

dont be so ignorant

or,

on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes,

you as usual display your idiocy

The states can only call for it, nothing more.

the paste i posted is from the Constitution jake

you are completely incorrect

i know you can not admit you are wrong

but you are

I can read as well as or better than you. I can also read commentary, SCOTUS opinions, and history. You have your opinion, and that is all well and good, but it means nothing.

jake you just digging your hole deeper

you are in fact completely incorrect on the topic

 

[JakeStarkey]

They can call it, they cannot form it.

To say the states can form one is to reveal a stupidity second only to steve_mcgarrett on the forum. You rank with shootspeeders, protectionist, kush, yurt, et al.

yes they can

dont be so ignorant

or,

on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes,

you as usual display your idiocy

The states can only call for it, nothing more.

the paste i posted is from the Constitution jake

you are completely incorrect

i know you can not admit you are wrong

but you are

I can read as well as or better than you. I can also read commentary, SCOTUS opinions, and history. You have your opinion, and that is all well and good, but it means nothing.

jake you just digging your hole deeper

you are in fact completely incorrect on the topic

Keep digging.

 

[jon_berzerk]

are fucking stupid or just fucking plain stupid you readit again stupid

They can call it, they cannot form it.

To say the states can form one is to reveal a stupidity second only to steve_mcgarrett on the forum. You rank with shootspeeders, protectionist, kush, yurt, et al.

yes they can

dont be so ignorant

or,

on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes,

you as usual display your idiocy

The states can only call for it, nothing more.

the paste i posted is from the Constitution jake

you are completely incorrect

i know you can not admit you are wrong

but you are

I can read as well as or better than you. I can also read commentary, SCOTUS opinions, and history. You have your opinion, and that is all well and good, but it means nothing. Congress would never allow the goobers from the far left and the far right and libertarian groups to come to a convention. Congress will never agree to call it.

obviously you can not read article 5 is very clear that the states can call a convention when 2/3 of the states call for it

 

[jon_berzerk]

jake proves he is ignorant once again --LOL

congress does not have a say it stupid

when 2/3s of the states call one



"Congress will never agree to call it."

 

[JakeStarkey]

They can call it, they cannot form it.

To say the states can form one is to reveal a stupidity second only to steve_mcgarrett on the forum. You rank with shootspeeders, protectionist, kush, yurt, et al.

yes they can

dont be so ignorant

or,

on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes,

you as usual display your idiocy

The states can only call for it, nothing more.

the paste i posted is from the Constitution jake

you are completely incorrect

i know you can not admit you are wrong

but you are

I can read as well as or better than you. I can also read commentary, SCOTUS opinions, and history. You have your opinion, and that is all well and good, but it means nothing. Congress would never allow the goobers from the far left and the far right and libertarian groups to come to a convention. Congress will never agree to call it.

obviously you can not read article 5 is very clear that the states can call a convention when 2/3 of the states call for it

They have no authority to convene it. None. Nada. They can call for it by petitioning Congress. That's all the can do.

 

[jon_berzerk]

yes they can

dont be so ignorant

or,

on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes,

you as usual display your idiocy

The states can only call for it, nothing more.

the paste i posted is from the Constitution jake

you are completely incorrect

i know you can not admit you are wrong

but you are

I can read as well as or better than you. I can also read commentary, SCOTUS opinions, and history. You have your opinion, and that is all well and good, but it means nothing.

jake you just digging your hole deeper

you are in fact completely incorrect on the topic

Keep digging.

i see you are also devoid of your own thoughts

--LOL

 

[jon_berzerk]

yes they can

dont be so ignorant

or,

on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes,

you as usual display your idiocy

The states can only call for it, nothing more.

the paste i posted is from the Constitution jake

you are completely incorrect

i know you can not admit you are wrong

but you are

I can read as well as or better than you. I can also read commentary, SCOTUS opinions, and history. You have your opinion, and that is all well and good, but it means nothing. Congress would never allow the goobers from the far left and the far right and libertarian groups to come to a convention. Congress will never agree to call it.

obviously you can not read article 5 is very clear that the states can call a convention when 2/3 of the states call for it

They have no authority to convene it. None. Nada. They can call for it by petitioning Congress. That's all the can do.

yes they do that is what it says stupid

 

[JakeStarkey]

All of the nation’s constitutional history and constitutional rights would be vulnerable to alteration and revision. Justice Antonin Scalia has said, “I would not want a constitutional convention. Whoa! Who knows what would come of it?” Statement Issued by the Brennan Center for Justice, Common Cause, Democracy 21, Issue One, People For the American Way, Public Citizen and USAction Opposing A Constitutional Convention

Congress would refuse, SCOTUS would agree, and that would be the end of it. The Jon Bezerks of the nation have no power in forcing this to happen.

 

[jon_berzerk]

All of the nation’s constitutional history and constitutional rights would be vulnerable to alteration and revision. Justice Antonin Scalia has said, “I would not want a constitutional convention. Whoa! Who knows what would come of it?” Statement Issued by the Brennan Center for Justice, Common Cause, Democracy 21, Issue One, People For the American Way, Public Citizen and USAction Opposing A Constitutional Convention

Congress would refuse, SCOTUS would agree, and that would be the end of it. The Jon Bezerks of the nation have no power in forcing this to happen.

not wanting one and saying it cant happpen are two differtn thiungs jakie --LOL

 

[JakeStarkey]

All of the nation’s constitutional history and constitutional rights would be vulnerable to alteration and revision. Justice Antonin Scalia has said, “I would not want a constitutional convention. Whoa! Who knows what would come of it?” Statement Issued by the Brennan Center for Justice, Common Cause, Democracy 21, Issue One, People For the American Way, Public Citizen and USAction Opposing A Constitutional Convention

Congress would refuse, SCOTUS would agree, and that would be the end of it. The Jon Bezerks of the nation have no power in forcing this to happen.

not wanting one and saying it cant happpen are two differtn thiungs jakie --LOL

wanting one and saying it could happen are two different things, berzerrky