Irrefutable legal arguments supporting the right of secession

[DigitalDrifter]

There is no legal right to secession, then or now or in the future, unless Congress either permits it or the Constitution is amended.

I just proved there is, dumbass.

Take your medication and go back to the home. The orderlies are looking for you.

Sheesh Bripat, you offered an opinion via a Google book and he offered a Supreme Court decision. That's a huge difference and you didn't "prove" a thing.

So because the SCOTUS say's it would be unconstitutional, would you then be all for the U.S. military to be sent in to kill citizens of a state if they voted to have control of their own destiny by seceding ?

 

[regent]

If there are irrefutable legal arguments that states have the right to secede, why didn't those Southern Civil War states use those irrefutable legal arguments earlier?

 

[bripat9643]

According to Professor H Newcomb Morse, “Nullification occurs when people of a state refuse to recognize the validity of an exercise of power by the national government which, in the state’s view, transcends the limited and enumerated delegated powers of the national constitution.”

.
Professor H Newcomb Morse - - just another states rights charlatan ...


those same people were for slavery ... that's why there is a national gov't, to keep an immoral aberration of a few from circumventing what is for the greater good for all.

.

Nothing but slander and ad hominems. It doesn't matter what the credentials of the good professor, do you have anything to counter his arguments?

I didn't think so.

You're a typical bootlicking Lincoln cult member.

 

[bripat9643]

There is no legal right to secession, then or now or in the future, unless Congress either permits it or the Constitution is amended.

I just proved there is, dumbass.

Take your medication and go back to the home. The orderlies are looking for you.

Sheesh Bripat, you offered an opinion via a Google book and he offered a Supreme Court decision. That's a huge difference and you didn't "prove" a thing.

So because the SCOTUS say's it would be unconstitutional, would you then be all for the U.S. military to be sent in to kill citizens of a state if they voted to have control of their own destiny by seceding ?

You know he would. A lot of these Lincoln cultists have said they were disappointed that Lincoln didn't kill even more Southerners than he did. They are a bloodthirsty lot.

 

[BluesLegend]

There is no legal right to secession, then or now or in the future, unless Congress either permits it or the Constitution is amended.

You need to read the declaration of independence fool.

 

[bripat9643]

If there are irrefutable legal arguments that states have the right to secede, why didn't those Southern Civil War states use those irrefutable legal arguments earlier?

Lincoln didn't give a damn about logic and facts. He was an accomplished manipulator and propagandist, and he used his skills to get the result he wanted. The dumbass Yankees were too stupid to see through his con.

 

[bripat9643]

There is no legal right to secession, then or now or in the future, unless Congress either permits it or the Constitution is amended.

I just proved there is, dumbass.

Take your medication and go back to the home. The orderlies are looking for you.

Sheesh Bripat, you offered an opinion via a Google book and he offered a Supreme Court decision. That's a huge difference and you didn't "prove" a thing.

The difference is the Google book has more credibility than the Supreme Court. Anyone who believes the justices on the court give a damn about what the Constitution actually says only reveal themselves to be supremely gullible.

 

[nuhuh]

There is no legal right to secession, then or now or in the future, unless Congress either permits it or the Constitution is amended.

I just proved there is, dumbass.

Take your medication and go back to the home. The orderlies are looking for you.

Sheesh Bripat, you offered an opinion via a Google book and he offered a Supreme Court decision. That's a huge difference and you didn't "prove" a thing.

So because the SCOTUS say's it would be unconstitutional, would you then be all for the U.S. military to be sent in to kill citizens of a state if they voted to have control of their own destiny by seceding ?

If you have no right under the Constitution to secede, you have in effect become an enemy of the state and have reduced your role in the state to one controlled by Jurisprudence and corrections.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The states need to re-claim their power to nullify. That was TAKEN and simply needs to be taken back.

Nonsense.

The states never had the ‘authority’ to ‘nullify,’ it was always the original intent of the Framing Generation that Federal law be supreme, that the rulings of Federal courts be supreme, and that the Constitution and its case law be the supreme law of the land, immune from attack by the states. (Article VI, US Cont., McCulloch v. Maryland, Cooper v. Aaron)

 

[nuhuh]

There is no legal right to secession, then or now or in the future, unless Congress either permits it or the Constitution is amended.

I just proved there is, dumbass.

Take your medication and go back to the home. The orderlies are looking for you.

Sheesh Bripat, you offered an opinion via a Google book and he offered a Supreme Court decision. That's a huge difference and you didn't "prove" a thing.

The difference is the Google book has more credibility than the Supreme Court. Anyone who believes the justices on the court give a damn about what the Constitution actually says only reveal themselves to be supremely gullible.

Yeah, I know you really want your concept to be true and it isn't. Try a rebellion and see how quickly it is shut down. I'm not kidding, if you think you could out bully the government you are certifiably crazy.

 

[bripat9643]

The states need to re-claim their power to nullify. That was TAKEN and simply needs to be taken back.

Nonsense.

The states never had the ‘authority’ to ‘nullify,’ it was always the original intent of the Framing Generation that Federal law be supreme, that the rulings of Federal courts be supreme, and that the Constitution and its case law be the supreme law of the land, immune from attack by the states. (Article VI, US Cont., McCulloch v. Maryland, Cooper v. Aaron)

If they had no right to nullify, then how did 7 of them do exactly that?

 

[bripat9643]

There is no legal right to secession, then or now or in the future, unless Congress either permits it or the Constitution is amended.

I just proved there is, dumbass.

Take your medication and go back to the home. The orderlies are looking for you.

Sheesh Bripat, you offered an opinion via a Google book and he offered a Supreme Court decision. That's a huge difference and you didn't "prove" a thing.

The difference is the Google book has more credibility than the Supreme Court. Anyone who believes the justices on the court give a damn about what the Constitution actually says only reveal themselves to be supremely gullible.

Yeah, I know you really want your concept to be true and it isn't. Try a rebellion and see how quickly it is shut down. I'm not kidding, if you think you could out bully the government you are certifiably crazy.

In other words, might makes right. Do have liberals follow the moral code of thugs?

 

[DigitalDrifter]

There is no legal right to secession, then or now or in the future, unless Congress either permits it or the Constitution is amended.

I just proved there is, dumbass.

Take your medication and go back to the home. The orderlies are looking for you.

Sheesh Bripat, you offered an opinion via a Google book and he offered a Supreme Court decision. That's a huge difference and you didn't "prove" a thing.

So because the SCOTUS say's it would be unconstitutional, would you then be all for the U.S. military to be sent in to kill citizens of a state if they voted to have control of their own destiny by seceding ?

If you have no right under the Constitution to secede, you have in effect become an enemy of the state and have reduced your role in the state to one controlled by Jurisprudence and corrections.

So yes then, you would be all for U.S. military personnel to be sent in and ordered to kill citizens of a state that democratically voted to leave the union.

Okay, got it, at least you're honest.

 

[bripat9643]

There is no legal right to secession, then or now or in the future, unless Congress either permits it or the Constitution is amended.

I just proved there is, dumbass.

Take your medication and go back to the home. The orderlies are looking for you.

Sheesh Bripat, you offered an opinion via a Google book and he offered a Supreme Court decision. That's a huge difference and you didn't "prove" a thing.

So because the SCOTUS say's it would be unconstitutional, would you then be all for the U.S. military to be sent in to kill citizens of a state if they voted to have control of their own destiny by seceding ?

If you have no right under the Constitution to secede, you have in effect become an enemy of the state and have reduced your role in the state to one controlled by Jurisprudence and corrections.

So yes then, you would be all for U.S. military personnel to be sent in and ordered to kill citizens of a state that democratically voted to leave the union.

Okay, got it, at least you're honest.

He obviously endorses the methods of Lincoln, Hitler and Stalin.

 

[nuhuh]

The states need to re-claim their power to nullify. That was TAKEN and simply needs to be taken back.

Nonsense.

The states never had the ‘authority’ to ‘nullify,’ it was always the original intent of the Framing Generation that Federal law be supreme, that the rulings of Federal courts be supreme, and that the Constitution and its case law be the supreme law of the land, immune from attack by the states. (Article VI, US Cont., McCulloch v. Maryland, Cooper v. Aaron)

If they had no right to nullify, then how did 7 of them do exactly that?

Take a look at what Scalia has to say about secession.

 

[DarkFury]

The states need to re-claim their power to nullify. That was TAKEN and simply needs to be taken back.

Nonsense.

The states never had the ‘authority’ to ‘nullify,’ it was always the original intent of the Framing Generation that Federal law be supreme, that the rulings of Federal courts be supreme, and that the Constitution and its case law be the supreme law of the land, immune from attack by the states. (Article VI, US Cont., McCulloch v. Maryland, Cooper v. Aaron)

This...
"
Yes, States Can Nullify Some Federal Laws, Not All
By Robert A. Levy
This article appeared in Investor’s Business Daily on March 18, 2013.
Rumblings from ardent states’ rights advocates grow louder in the wake of perceived federal overreach in such areas as health care, immigration reform, marijuana regulation and gun control.

Indeed, on March 13 the Oklahoma House voted overwhelmingly to invalidate President Barack Obama’s signature legislation, the Affordable Care Act. That process is known as nullification. But is it constitutional?

In a nutshell: (1) State officials need not enforce federal laws that the state has determined to be unconstitutional; nor may Congress mandate that states enact specific laws. But (2), states may not block federal authorities who attempt to enforce a federal law unless a court has held that the law is unconstitutional. And (3), individuals are not exempt from prosecution by the federal government just because the state where they reside has legalized an activity or pronounced that a federal law is unconstitutional; if convicted, individuals can attempt to vindicate their constitutional rights in court."

From here...
Yes States Can Nullify Some Federal Laws Not All Cato Institute

 

[bripat9643]

The states need to re-claim their power to nullify. That was TAKEN and simply needs to be taken back.

Nonsense.

The states never had the ‘authority’ to ‘nullify,’ it was always the original intent of the Framing Generation that Federal law be supreme, that the rulings of Federal courts be supreme, and that the Constitution and its case law be the supreme law of the land, immune from attack by the states. (Article VI, US Cont., McCulloch v. Maryland, Cooper v. Aaron)

If they had no right to nullify, then how did 7 of them do exactly that?

Take a look at what Scalia has to say about secession.

If you haven't figured it out by now, I don't give a damn what the hacks on the Supreme Court say about the Constitution. They are all political whores with no honor or integrity.

 

[nuhuh]

There is no legal right to secession, then or now or in the future, unless Congress either permits it or the Constitution is amended.

I just proved there is, dumbass.

Take your medication and go back to the home. The orderlies are looking for you.

Sheesh Bripat, you offered an opinion via a Google book and he offered a Supreme Court decision. That's a huge difference and you didn't "prove" a thing.

So because the SCOTUS say's it would be unconstitutional, would you then be all for the U.S. military to be sent in to kill citizens of a state if they voted to have control of their own destiny by seceding ?

If you have no right under the Constitution to secede, you have in effect become an enemy of the state and have reduced your role in the state to one controlled by Jurisprudence and corrections.

So yes then, you would be all for U.S. military personnel to be sent in and ordered to kill citizens of a state that democratically voted to leave the union.

Okay, got it, at least you're honest.

I didn't say anything about killing, but martial law is tough and nothing that you would want to live under,

 

[DigitalDrifter]

You can choose to join the union, but don't even think about leaving............


'Relax,' said the night man,
'We are programmed to receive.
You can check-out any time you like,
But you can never leave!'

 

[bripat9643]

I just proved there is, dumbass.

Take your medication and go back to the home. The orderlies are looking for you.

Sheesh Bripat, you offered an opinion via a Google book and he offered a Supreme Court decision. That's a huge difference and you didn't "prove" a thing.

So because the SCOTUS say's it would be unconstitutional, would you then be all for the U.S. military to be sent in to kill citizens of a state if they voted to have control of their own destiny by seceding ?

If you have no right under the Constitution to secede, you have in effect become an enemy of the state and have reduced your role in the state to one controlled by Jurisprudence and corrections.

So yes then, you would be all for U.S. military personnel to be sent in and ordered to kill citizens of a state that democratically voted to leave the union.

Okay, got it, at least you're honest.

I didn't say anything about killing, but martial law is tough and nothing that you would want to live under,

Martial law is enforced by killing people, asshole.