Article I, section 10, and secession

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Longshot, May 2, 2018.

  1. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
  2. DarkSkies

    DarkSkies Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    4,522
    Likes Received:
    577
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hold on ... you might be right, but there could be limits:

    The first part says that, "No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation..."

    Just by the language, as long as the state seceded and will not have a treaty, alliance or join a confederation, they can go. The likelihood of that state remaining sovereign though is another story.
     
    Longshot likes this.
  3. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Such a prohibition would only apply to the states in the union, not France or England or any of the sovereign states that have chosen to leave the union.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2018
  4. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    60,465
    Likes Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    113
    and you remain refuted. as the supreme court pointed out
     
  5. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    60,465
    Likes Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Last edited: May 2, 2018
    ThorInc and mdrobster like this.
  6. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just to clarify, this is a thread about the text of the article I, section 10, not the actions of the federal government. The question is: Does it contain any language prohibiting any state from leaving the union?
     
  7. DarkSkies

    DarkSkies Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    4,522
    Likes Received:
    577
    Trophy Points:
    113
  8. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    60,465
    Likes Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They can not, as the supreme court pointed out in the case I cited. States do not have any legal mechanism to leave the union, unless congress approves, or an article V convention is called and the constitution amended.

    .
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2018
    mdrobster likes this.
  9. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wouldn't that clause only refer to the states in the union, not France, or England, or any state that had since left the union?

    If there is no prohibition on a state leaving the union, than a state may. And then after it does, it may enter into any treaty it wishes, since it's not a state in the union.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2018
  10. ArmySoldier

    ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    Messages:
    32,182
    Likes Received:
    12,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Longshot likes this.
  11. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    60,465
    Likes Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    113
    which has no relevance to the fact states can not secede, unless congress approves. They are just as wrong as the OP.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2018
    mdrobster likes this.
  12. ArmySoldier

    ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    Messages:
    32,182
    Likes Received:
    12,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That was my point.
     
  13. DarkSkies

    DarkSkies Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    4,522
    Likes Received:
    577
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Texas wasn't allowed to join the Confederacy per article 10. There is no ruling prohibiting a state leaving on its own as long as they not join any alliance, treaty, or confederacy though. We haven't heard such a case because all states come to their senses when they think to leave the Union.
     
  14. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    60,465
    Likes Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    113
    and that question has been answered, by the supreme court.
     
  15. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    60,465
    Likes Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I just gave you the ruling showing otherwise.
     
  16. DarkSkies

    DarkSkies Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    4,522
    Likes Received:
    577
    Trophy Points:
    113
    By jurisdiction yes. You mention foreign states though. Give me an example of a state leaving the Union for a foreign state and not risk war. I can try and answer better that way.
     
  17. DarkSkies

    DarkSkies Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    4,522
    Likes Received:
    577
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That was the ruling. Texas lost because they were part of the illegal Conferency. Article 10 talks about unions, alliances, and treaties. It says nothing about singular states.
     
  18. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    60,465
    Likes Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I literally just quoted the portion that says otherwise.............
     
  19. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    After a state leaves the union, which is not prohibited by the constitution, then the constitution no long applies to that state. The constitution only applies to the states in the union. Therefore, a state who has left the union is no more bound by the constitution than is France or Belgium. It may enter into any confederation it chooses, just as France or Belgium may.
     
  20. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When a state leaves the union, which is not prohibited by the constitution, it would no longer be a state in the union but would considered a foreign state such as Germany or Italy. The rules that apply to the states in the union would not apply to it, just as they would not apply to Germany or Italy.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2018
  21. DarkSkies

    DarkSkies Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    4,522
    Likes Received:
    577
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ok, let's say I concede this particular point here. The part of the ruling you quoted still says that if other states allow it, Texas can leave. Ultimately a state can leave.
     
  22. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    60,465
    Likes Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I never said they couldn't. I said there is no legal mechanism for a state to just up and secede. Congress must agree to expel that state from the union. It is the ONLY way a state can leave.
     
    mdrobster likes this.
  23. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The ruling cited is contrary to the constitution, as the constitution has no language prohibiting a state from leaving the union.
     
  24. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    60,465
    Likes Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A state can not leave the union, per the constitution and the supreme court, unless congress agrees to it.
     
    mdrobster likes this.
  25. rahl

    rahl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    60,465
    Likes Received:
    6,623
    Trophy Points:
    113
    and your opinion on the ruling is meaningless. Article 1 section 10.
     

Share This Page