What is your definition of a progressive?whiterock said:Fathom the irony of a progressive making an argument premised on a literal/limited interpretation of the Constitution.TexasScientist said:That's been a matter of debate, at least as far back as early 19th century. Appomattox ended the question. If you want to break up the Union, call a constitutional convention, or pass an amendment, or win a revolution.Oldbear83 said:Once again you have it backwards. There is no specific prohibition in the Constitution to prohibit secession, which makes it a state decision. You can point to law against secession, but that was addressed in that prior post.TexasScientist said:Maybe you should actually read the 10th Amendment. There is nothing there that gives a state the authority to change a federal law or the Constitution. If what you believe were true, there would be no need for federal courts. Each state would be on its own.Oldbear83 said:Maybe you can go back and read my post about the 10th Amendment, instead of just repeating the same thing over and over again.TexasScientist said:Only congress or the federal courts can change federal law. States can pass laws in conflict with federal law or the constitution.Oldbear83 said:Pretty much any.TexasScientist said:Which state has authority to change federal law?Oldbear83 said:
The "the states don't have authority" argument is wrong.
The Constitution of the United States establishes the powers of the Federal Government.
The 10th Amendment of that Constitution establishes that powers not granted to the Federal Government belong to the States.
There is no clause in the US Constitution which specifically states that states may not leave the union. Ergo, the decision defaults to the states.
Now there is law which says states may not secede, and the US courts have ruled that secession is not allowed, but courts have made wrong decisions before and not a few times, and the US courts have no interest in supporting a state which means to leave the union. Thus, the matter is not settled in terms of constitutionality.
Now with that said, I believe there is no state in the Union which gains from leaving the US, but we are discussing whether it can be done, not whether it would be wise to do so.
Who'd be dumb enough to try? Remains to be seen.
“It is impossible to get a man to understand something if his livelihood depends on him not understanding.” ~ Upton Sinclair