FW: Towns and Townships
fitzke at MICHCOM.NET
Thu Nov 14 22:22:26 UTC 2002
My comment was based, primarily, on the first sentence of the Constitution,
whic says, "We, the People....do ordain and establish this Constitution..."
The debate is whether the Constitution is a creature of the states, and
thus, the individual states could, arguably, secede, or a creature of the
My preference is the latter. That view avoids much of the rhetoric about
state's rights (which the Supreme Court chose to ignore\d in the Bush v Gore
case out of Florida).
----- Original Message -----
From: Frank Abate <abatefr at earthlink.net>
To: <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 11:10 AM
Subject: FW: Towns and Townships
> Bob F commented on my posting as follows:
> It's my understanding there is some considerable dispute over the accuracy
> of this statement, re "legally correct".
> What I meant by "legally correct" was that, per my reading of the
> Constitution and historical precedents at the time of the secession of
> Southern states, they had every right to do so. Nothing I found in the US
> Constitution disallowed secession. What DID disallow it was Lincoln's
> strong-willed political stance, backed by the armies of the Union. Armies
> always trump constitutions. And with the conclusion of that war, a
> precedent was set. Now I expect it would be very hard, if not
> unconstitutional, for a state to secede.
> Needless to say, the Confederacy was not, so to speak, politically
> Frank Abate
> > (and the fact that the Confederate states were legally
> > correct, but wanted for guns and ammo factories),
> > Frank
More information about the Ads-l