No. Please post the revelent clause prohibiting a citizen from purchasing/selling real estate.
Congressional approval is required for any change in status. That would include secession.
No. Please cite the revelent clause requiring Congress to approve the sale/purchase of land, the clause requiring a state to seek approval to cede/sell/purchase lands. Please cite the revelent section of the Constitution prohibiting secession.
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Any actions taken by the Texas legislature supporting illegal secession, and an legislation passed supporting the rebellion, were illegal.
Nonsense. What came first, the states or the federal government? Which came first, the state governments or the people? The people are sovereign, possessors of certain inalienable rights, 'whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.'
The Constitution has no prohibition against the people of the state changing their form of government.
The federal Constitution has no prohibition against the people resuming their delegated powers, it has an EXPLICT reservation to the powers 'powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it'.
Pleas read my posts before replying. You said "The state could pass legislation removing the area from it's jurisdiction. No agreement of compact with another state necessary. Borders reduced or enlaged, Congress out of the loop." That is illegal and prohibited by Article I, Section 10, Clause 3.
No. Please cite the revelent clause requiring Congress to approve the sale/purchase of land, the clause requiring a state to seek approval to cede/sell/purchase lands.
Depends. Are you referring to a state selling land it owns to a U.S. subsidiary of a foreign company to build a factory? I don't think that requires Congressional approval. But I suspect your talking about something ridiculous like California selling Orange County to Japan. That would be an agreement with a foreign country and unless approved by Congress would violate Article I, Section 10, Clause 3.
Please cite the revelent section of the Constitution prohibiting secession.
There isn't one. However it was the unilateral action of the states which made secession illegal. One can infer this from Article I and Article IV regarding actions states are not permitted and which required Congessional approval in change of state status.
Nonsense. What came first, the states or the federal government?
When they were permitted to join the Union, states agreed to abide by the Constitution, including the part which made the "Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." So any laws or acts of the legislature which violated the Constitution were illegal. That included the acts of the Texas legislature in support of secession and the following rebellion, or so the Supreme Court ruled in 1869.
The Constitution has no prohibition against the people of the state changing their form of government.
Sure it does. If Georgia decided to declare itself a hereditary monarchy with His Royal Highness, King 4ConservativeJustices as ruler and belevolent despot then that would violate Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 and Article IV Section 4.
The federal Constitution has no prohibition against the people resuming their delegated powers, it has an EXPLICT reservation to the powers 'powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it'.
And the Constitution explicitly delegates the power to admit states into the Union and to approve changes in their status and certain of their actions. Implicit in this is approval for leaving the Union altogether.