This is hilarious. This says: "Murder isn't illegal. You can kill all the people you want to kill, but at some point, the government might send some people after you and arrest you for it. But you can totally do it!" Like the dumbest support argument... ever.
My position is why should a state care whether it is legal or not? They are seceding from our clauses and lawses, are they not?
Also, I don't think that clause is talking about secession. You think that just because it has the word "confederation?"
Then you understand why the federal govt would forcibly stop a rogue nation from forming in their borders?
If it walks like a duck The argumemt for 200 plus years has been the role of the states and the central govt from the articles of confederation to the constitution. The AoC concerned state sovereignty, the constitution concerns individual freedom. The constitution purposely limits the individual power of a singular state.
I am the Field Marshall who is in actual.comtrol. I see a state sponsored illness in your immediate future.
The implication being, obviously, that they are not a sovereign state and have agreed on such a status, meaning they can't pick and choose when to follow the federal government, nor jump in and out at their whim. Also, states believe they can do shit all the time that they actually can't. North Dakota has a law, basically, banning abortion and South Carolina has a law now making Obamacare illegal, as two examples of many. Guess who will win? Simply because the states think they have the right or consider themselves to have it doesn't actually make it so.
I agree with this, but in doing so the founder's underlying assumptions about the nature of the states seem to come out --that they are powerful and sovereign entities whose sovereignty must be curtailed for our experiment to have any prayer at working. They are trying to get rid of the problems and squabbles that were present under the articles. That is what Uni's post (Article 1, Section 1) is referencing, IMO. I don't think that that particular clause has anything to do with secession.
