Replies

"Any power not granted to the federal government WAS NOT GRANTED!"

Again, can you show me where the founders thought that secession was a power that the states had and retained independent of the federal government. They never talked about secession to my knowledge. So you are saying that this "power" of secession was something that the founders reserved to the states when they had never thought this "power" up to begin with. They allowed that you could rebell through the Declaration of Indepedence. The Southern states tried that and lost. Get over it.

An.American.Expatriate, let's try explaining this with pictures:

Let A represent "Federal Government's powers as delegated & Enumerated by the Constitution" and be the ellipse formed by areas #1 & #2.
Let B represent "State Government's powers and responsibilities" and be the ellipse formed by areas #2 & #3.
Let C represent the rights & responsibilities of the people and be the rectangle #4.

Because of the nature of authority, a certain power/position cannot institute a separate/subordinate power/position with GREATER powers than the parent.
This diagram then correctly shows the derivations of powers known as governments to be of less sweeping powers than that of the people.
There are some areas where there is an overlap between Federal and State powers, namely defense: witness the clause of [state] militia called up in service of the Federal Government in the Constitution.

The tenth amendment states that: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
This is correctly portrayed as the shaded area ['powers not delegated'], as you can see the Federal government has no authority over powers not so delegated.

So you are saying that this "power" of secession was something that the founders reserved to the states when they had never thought this "power" up to begin with.

And this is where your understanding of what the constitution is, is flawed. Hamilton wrote, in regards to the Bill of Rights [which he REJECTED!], that such a BoR was dangerous as it would IMPLY powers not granted specifically - IOW, the Government was given specific limited powers - nowhere is a power listed that confers a power upon the federal government to COMPELL a member state to remain in the Union - thus it did not have the power to do so (legally). That the founders "never thought" about sucession can not be proved - what CAN be proved is that they did NOT forbid it in the constitution!