#calexit... PFFFT!!!

Read the FEDERALIST PAPERS. Being able to exit the union was an option offered as an argument in favor of adopting the new Constitution. Original intent anyone? And, victories in battle are De facto affairs - the maxim of law is "In times of War, Laws fall silent." So the decision in the earlier case you cite is Reviewable. Also ...I think you may be short a C.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/secede?s=t

Nope. It's usually a good idea to fact-check. I'm glad your so ecstatically happy all the time.

Said THINK. So folks can read and address points of FACT. AWESOME.

I stand corrected. Any OTHER problems or is silence to be construe as acquiesce or consent, ideally.

EXCEPT that the Constitution supersedes the Federalist Papers. Nowhere in the Constitution is there a provision for states to leave the union, and one of the results of the Civil War is that there is now a precedent (which carries a lot of weight in law) for states NOT being allowed to leave.

Original intent is all well-and-good, but written law TRUMPS it.

Sorry. Couldn't resist. ;)

Well wrong and wrong again. The Costitution is a CONTRACT.Meeting of the minds and all. Sure there is a bit of support for the position that you take....but Galileo wasn't't always as popular as the pope. Doesn't mean he was wrong.

The Federalist Papers are Constantly referred to onquestions of Con law - exactly because they were what SOLD US that bill o' goods. If they were meaningless....Del we even have a contract.

Acts of War - are the very DEFINITION of de facto. By your logic Hitler Keeps Poland and the Czech Republic. In times of WAR laws fall silent. When the EXECUTIVE orders and RECONSTRUCTION actually end....perhaps the court will correct that...

Assuming Ft. Sumpter as the causus belli - and a legit event occuring organically (not staged like 'Poland's assault on Germany') - then THAT is what authorizes the Civil War....not seccesion. Once CONGRESS adjourns without a day for next meeting - and lacking a quorum....union dissolved. Executive ORDERS notwithstanding. What you have ever since is London based Corporation - ask Ralph Nader for the specifics...I know it is true...
But I haven't pulled the charter myself.

And ACTUALLY - LEX NON SCRIPTA rules. Try the 9th and 10th amendments. By your logic....meaningless. And before we start deporting kids of immigrants etc.. Please go look up the oldest legal reference to BIRTHRIGHT Citizenship - from this country (Try Corpus Juris Secundum - or a law librarian). Predates the 14th amendment by just a bit.

I see now that you live in a constant state of euphoria.

If only. I feel like the author of ecclesiastes, all too often. The decision on birthright Citizenship is actually a state Citizenship case I do believe. Irish immigrant family has a baby and returns home w/ her. An uncle (here) leaves her an estate....now people want to screw her of her deal. Cause FOREIGN. 1850ish court sez NO. SHE had rights from birth base upon her birth in NY. So an early DUAL Citizen - pre 14th Amndmt.

Thanks for taking the bait.

I was partial to the laughing Shaq... I think I upvotedit - it might unsubmerge that thread - but rrlly.

Jeff Sessions for AG...ASHCROFT unavailable.