- Aug 27, 2008
- 18,450
- 1,823
- 205
The question is, do you think states have the right to secede from the union, if they so choose to?
I believe this topic is often dismissed because of it's assumed association with the issue of slavery due to the Confederate States of America allowing slavery, while the northern states did not allow it. However, the truth is that there was also slavery permitted in the Union during the time of the Civil War, and Lincoln had no intention of ending slavery when he began the Civil War.
Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, and West Virginia referred to as "border states," and they were part of the Union and allowed slavery. Lincoln confessed many times that he did not believe black people equal to white people, and that he was not adverse to them being slaves. He merely wanted to "save" the Union. His Emancipation Proclamation didn't free every slave in America, it merely freed the slaves in the Confederate States. Or more accurately, Lincoln "freed" only the slaves that he didn't actually have any authority to free. His intentions were clear, because the war was not, at the time, going in his favor, he wanted Confederate slaves to rise up and kill their masters.
However, secession and slavery are two different topics, I am merely trying to point out that they don't have to go hand in hand. More importantly, not all people who believe secession is legal believe that slavery was good or just or anything of the sort. Onto the topic at hand.
"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government..." - Declaration of Independence 1776
It is my opinion that secession is legal, and that the federal government has no authority to stop any state that wishes to secede for any reason. If the benefits of seceding outweigh the negatives, then that state should be free and clear to leave the Union without incident.
Those that will argue that the Supreme Court has decided that secession is illegal are correct, they certainly did decide that in White v. Texas. However, I ask those that believe in this decision to find for me where in the Constitution the federal government is given the authority to stop states from leaving the Union. The Constitution was meant to restrain the power of the federal government, not that of the citizens or the states. So where in the world did the Supreme Court find this authority for the federal government to stop states from seceding?
The truth is that they made it up. Therefore, their decision that secession is illegal is unconstitutional and should not be enforced.
"...whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and no force; that to this compact each state acceded as a state, and is an integral party; that this government, created by this compact, was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself, since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers..." - Thomas Jefferson, Kentucky Resolve of 1798
The part of Jefferson's quote that says, "that this government, created by this compact, was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself, since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers," is especially telling. The Supreme Court is part of the federal government, and it has basically been assumed that it has the final say in matters of "constitutional law." However, this quote shows that Jefferson did not believe this to be so.
Since the Supreme Court is part of the federal government, Jefferson says that it is not the final word on all things Constitutional, because they will obviously decide that the Constitution gives them unlimited power. This certainly merits some reflection on our parts. Do we really want a government that gets to decide the limit of it's own powers, or would we rather have the Constitutional Republic the founders' created for us?
I believe this topic is often dismissed because of it's assumed association with the issue of slavery due to the Confederate States of America allowing slavery, while the northern states did not allow it. However, the truth is that there was also slavery permitted in the Union during the time of the Civil War, and Lincoln had no intention of ending slavery when he began the Civil War.
Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, and West Virginia referred to as "border states," and they were part of the Union and allowed slavery. Lincoln confessed many times that he did not believe black people equal to white people, and that he was not adverse to them being slaves. He merely wanted to "save" the Union. His Emancipation Proclamation didn't free every slave in America, it merely freed the slaves in the Confederate States. Or more accurately, Lincoln "freed" only the slaves that he didn't actually have any authority to free. His intentions were clear, because the war was not, at the time, going in his favor, he wanted Confederate slaves to rise up and kill their masters.
However, secession and slavery are two different topics, I am merely trying to point out that they don't have to go hand in hand. More importantly, not all people who believe secession is legal believe that slavery was good or just or anything of the sort. Onto the topic at hand.
"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government..." - Declaration of Independence 1776
It is my opinion that secession is legal, and that the federal government has no authority to stop any state that wishes to secede for any reason. If the benefits of seceding outweigh the negatives, then that state should be free and clear to leave the Union without incident.
Those that will argue that the Supreme Court has decided that secession is illegal are correct, they certainly did decide that in White v. Texas. However, I ask those that believe in this decision to find for me where in the Constitution the federal government is given the authority to stop states from leaving the Union. The Constitution was meant to restrain the power of the federal government, not that of the citizens or the states. So where in the world did the Supreme Court find this authority for the federal government to stop states from seceding?
The truth is that they made it up. Therefore, their decision that secession is illegal is unconstitutional and should not be enforced.
"...whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and no force; that to this compact each state acceded as a state, and is an integral party; that this government, created by this compact, was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself, since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers..." - Thomas Jefferson, Kentucky Resolve of 1798
The part of Jefferson's quote that says, "that this government, created by this compact, was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself, since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers," is especially telling. The Supreme Court is part of the federal government, and it has basically been assumed that it has the final say in matters of "constitutional law." However, this quote shows that Jefferson did not believe this to be so.
Since the Supreme Court is part of the federal government, Jefferson says that it is not the final word on all things Constitutional, because they will obviously decide that the Constitution gives them unlimited power. This certainly merits some reflection on our parts. Do we really want a government that gets to decide the limit of it's own powers, or would we rather have the Constitutional Republic the founders' created for us?
