Posted on 05/19/2002 5:57:12 PM PDT by aconservaguy
The county in which I live is still under the consent decree. This means the Feds are in charge of the school district. I have oft wondered what some big suits in DC know about the educational needs of kids in our locality. The Feds have levied so many "programs" on our school district, it is being strangled. I never connected the consent decree and the 14th.
But that was not Lincoln's view, now was it? He maintained that the states never left the Union.
What has Lincoln's view got to do with the actions of the states or their representatives? The so-called seceded states voluntarily gave up their representation in the Congress.
But since you mention President Lincoln, let's quote his views on secession:
"What is now combatted, is the position that secession consistent with the Constitution -- is lawful, and peaceful. It is not contended that there is any express law for it; and nothing should ever be implied as law, which leads to unjust or absurd consequences. The nation purchased, with money, the countries out of which several of these states were formed. Is it just that they shall go off without leave, and without refunding? The nation paid very large sums, (in the aggregate, I believe, nearly a hundred millions) to relieve Florida of the aboriginal tribes. Is it just that she shall now be off without consent, or without making any return?
The nation is now in debt for money applied to the benefit of the so-called seceding states, in common with the rest. Is it just, either that creditors shall go unpaid, or the remaining States pay for the whole? A part of the present national debt was contracted to pay the old debts of Texas. Is it just that she shall leave, pay no part of it herself?
Again, if one state may secede, so may another; and then when all shall have seceded, none is left to pay the debts. Is this quite just to creditors? Did we notify them of this sage view of ours when we borrowed their money? If we now recognize this doctrine, by allowing the seceders to go in peace, it is difficult to see what we can do, if others choose to go, or to extort terms terms upon which they will promise to remain...
If all the states, save one, should assert the power to drive that one out of the Union, it is presumed the whole class of seceder politicians would at once deny the power, and denounce the act as the greatest outrage upon State rights.
But suppose that precisely the same act, instead of being called "driving the one out," should be called "the seceding of the others from that one," it would exactly what the seceders claim to do; unless, indeed, they make the point, that the one, because it is a minority, may rightfully do, what the others because they are a majority may not rightfully do. These politicians are subtle, and profound, on the rights of minorities. They are not so partial to that power, which made the Constitution, and speaks from the preamble, calling itself "We the People."
A. Lincoln, 7/4/61
Walt
And the Supreme Court ruled in 1862 that the President was authorized in using force to put down the rebellion, citing the Militia Act of 1792 as amended in 1795.
Walt
Cockroaches don't much like the light.
Walt
You have real problem joining a thread without bashing Southerners. Your counterparts make you look really bad - they carry on threads with dignity and intelligent discussion.
Maybe you could actually read this article before posting your slanderous cut and paste assault. I'm going back to my policy of skipping over your lengthy posts, just as many other FReepers do.
Good Day.
The point is that the representatives from the so-called states voluntarily gave up their representation in the Congress. And you know that very well, and have often maintained that the Constitution no longer applied to the seceded states.
So your trying to undermine the 14th amendment by saying that states cannot be deprived of their suffrage is just the worst kind of hypocritical crap. And I am very glad to expose it, and you.
Walt
Hey Walt, why don't you post the section of US Code that defines treason? I gave it to you the other day - have you allready forgotten what it said?
I don't see how that has any relevance to the issue of whether the Southern states were still states at the end of the Civil War, an issue that the Supreme Court seems to have decided in Texas v. White.
I don't see how that has any relevance to the issue of whether the Southern states were still states at the end of the Civil War, an issue that the Supreme Court seems to have decided in Texas v. White.
Just sorta the cherry on top.
Walt
A state cannot voluntarily give up its representation in Congress while still a member of the union. To wit, Article 1 of the Constitution: "The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States...." (S2) and "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State...." (S3). So the question simply comes down to whether or not the states were still in the union at the time. If they were, then they had every right to send representatives and senators to Washington. If they were not, then they weren't bound by any decisions made in Washington. I don't see any other choices.
They thought they were out of the Union. That seems sufficient to me to say that the loyal members could seat whomever they wanted.
Also, Stainless was trying to play fast and loose with the facts. He was in such a big hurry to slam the Congress he forgot that he had in the past stated MOST emphatically that the so-called seceded states were in fact out of the Union.
Walt
It is not inconsistent to say both (1) that courts should have held that states have the legal right to secede, and (2) that, under the law as our courts have decided it, states do not have the right to secede and are not extinguished as entities by an attempt at secession. As a matter of fact, I believe both of those propositions myself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.