The Fair Vote

Nope. You can't produce the article, section, and clause. My assertion remains unrefuted.

 

The entire premise of the case was texas didn't owe, because they weren't a state at the time. The court then pointed out, that texas never left the union, as states can not secede. They then cited the specific language in the constitution which precludes a state from leaving. You can flail about and stomp your feet all you want, but states will still not be able to secede. Texas v White.

 

proven false

 

No it's not false. You can't produce the article, section, and clause that contains the prohibition on any of the sovereign states from leaving the union. That is a true statement.

 

proven false

 

Okay, what was that language?

Texas argued that as a previously independent entity, it had sovereignty over its finances. The Court ruled that as a member of the Union at that time it did not and any change in it's legal rights would require an Act of Congress. Texas wasn't arguing that it was a independent, winning that case would have just meant it could play more with its money. Nowhere did the court rule on whether or not Texas (or any other state) could leave because that was beyond the scope of the case.

At best you can argue that a state can't leave unilaterally (just as they can't join unilaterally) but the Constitution doesn't actually say anything on the matter so it remains a legal grey area. Note that the US didn't take any legal action against the CSA and only after the conclusion of the war were those states reintegrated. Indeed President Buchanan was willing to send them on their way with nothing but well wishes and President Lincoln, while ideologically opposed, could find no way to oppose them until they attacked Ft. Sumpter. If folks hadn't started shooting at each other, the whole affair would have been as bloodless as the collapse of the Soviet Union because no laws were being broken. No laws addressing the issue have ever been passed so it remains just as legal today.

 

You keep saying that like it magically becomes true.

 

I don't think you're quite understand what I'm asserting. Here it is: You can't produce the article, section, and clause that contains the prohibition on any of the sovereign states from leaving the union.

 

Proven false.

 

nope.............................

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/74/700

 

its always been true. no magic required.

 

and your assertion has been proven false. It's right in the ruling, texas v white.

 

yes, I have proven your claims false.

 

You can't produce the article, section, clause, and specific text prohibiting any of the sovereign states from leaving the union. I'm not asserting anything about Texas v. White.

 

and I've proven your assertion false.

 

Remember, I said you can't produce the article, section, clause, and specific text prohibiting any of the sovereign states from leaving the union. Have you cited the specific text?

 

And I've proven your assertion false.

 

Oh, really? Can you provide a link to the post where you produce the article, section, clause, and specific text prohibiting any of the sovereign states from leaving the union?

 

I've done so in dozens of posts. Texas v White. the ruling specifically cites the portion of the constitution precluding secession. as you know.

 

Oh, a dozen. So can you point me to any one of these dozen where you produce the article, section, clause, and specific text prohibiting any of the sovereign states from leaving the union?

 

The one you quoted, which points you to texas v white, which cites the language.

 

You seem to be misunderstanding my claim. My claim is that you can't identify the article, section, and clause, nor cite the specific language that prohibits any of the several sovereign states from abandoning the union.

You didn't state the article, section, and clause. Nor did you cite the language.

So, as I have asserted, you can't identify the article, section, and clause, nor cite the specific language that prohibits any of the several sovereign states from abandoning the union.

 

and you seem to think this is fooling anyone. I've repeatedly done so.

proven false

proven false

 

You have cited the language and specified the article, section, and clause? In which post did you do this? Can you provide a link?

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/the-fair-vote.564549/page-50#post-1071261149