Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. Long who wrote (222283)	10/3/2007 4:13:56 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794315

The Nays had it. True, but nothing is forever. The discussion at least as far as South Louisiana is concerned needs to be reopened. Or do you really think the US Army is going to come down here in this day and age and subjugate us? South Louisiana is treated like the crazy cousin in the attic, anyway. We promise not to embarrass you any further, no need to watch the horrid videos when the next Big One strikes. All you gotta do is say, yeeup, let them have their own country if that is what they want. Let my people go!

To: D. Long who wrote (222283)	10/3/2007 5:07:23 PM
From: goldworldnet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794315

Did the Supreme Court ever rule on the legality of secession? (U.S. Civil War: The beginning) Yes, it did-- after the war. Perhaps the clearest statement is in the case Texas v. White (74 U.S. 700). Chief Justice Chase, writing for the court in its 1869 decision, said: "The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States. ... Considered, therefore, as transactions under the Constitution, the Ordinance of Secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the Acts of her Legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. ... Our conclusion, therefore, is, that Texas continued to be a State, and a State of the Union, notwithstanding the transactions to which we have referred." The entire decision is available on the Web at supct.law.cornell.edu stason.org * * *

To: D. Long who wrote (222283)	10/3/2007 5:39:57 PM
From: Tom Clarke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794315

Methinks we a national discussion of that issue starting in 1861 We also talked about it in 1815. I think it was assumed then that states had a right to secede. It was ridiculed, but no one said they couldn't do it. >>The Hartford Convention is an event in 1815 in the United States during the War of 1812 in which New England's opposition to the war reached the point where secession from the United States was discussed. The end of the war with a return to the status quo ante bellum disgraced the Federalist Party, which disbanded in most places. en.wikipedia.org