West Virginia was formed illegally. If the states had no right to succeed then in no way did West Virginia have "consent of the legislatures of the states involved."
Article IV Section 3.
The admission of West Virginia was outside of the Constitution.
If you accept that West Virginia exists then you accept that the South had a right to leave the Union.
Bonus: The south did have that right because they had to "reapply" to reenter the Union.
Virginia was seceded from the US at the time even though it could be argued they did not have a right. Therefore it is a super gray area and the process to admit states from existing states was not needed to be followed due to the turmoil.
But the "reason for the war" was that stated didn't have that right even though we divorced England in The Declaration of Independence. The generals from West Point studied from a government textbook that proclaimed that right.
Actually, it was the Crown, first the Parliament and then the King, that abdicated rule in the Colonies by removing them from the protection of the Empire and making war on them as if they were enemy states. See the Prohibitory Act, John Adams and James Wilson.
The Declaration of Independence simply stated the reality that the colonies were already independent states, but now bound them together as a new nation with a confederated form of government. Up until July 1776, the Union had existed since 1774 but only in an economic sense while maintaining the claim of being loyal British subjects.
What happened in 1860, was in no way similar. 10 states attempted to steal an election and when they failed, they engaged in insurrection and rebellion, violating numerous parts of the Constitution. It was the culmination of over 6 decades of what I call the Dominos of Disunion Conspiracy, spurred on by Europeans intent on destroying the USA from within by causing division and chaos.
We supported Texas in their succession from Mexico. I need to find the name of the book that Generals like Lee et all studied at West Point that proclaimed succession as a right. You truly think that people that left a union the British Empire would lock themselves into an unbreakable union? That is very naive.
I personally agree that there is a right to secede but the North fought to keep the South and the South lost, and in reality we all lost shortly after with the DC Organic Act of 1871
No winners write the rules and break them too. You can't say the south had no right to leave and break the constitution to add another state. End the rebellion and let Virginia sort out their problem.
On its face the formation of WV was arguably unconstitutional. However, because VA was in a state if rebellion, and a legislature pledging loyalty to the Union was formed and relocated to the western counties, arguably when those western countries petitioned that legitimate government in exile to secede from VA, their request was granted. I agree that it was quite the legal gymnastics of process and I'm still a 50/50 of whether or not I can agree with the reasoning... it works, but only barely.
There is no constitutional right for a state to secede (let alone unilaterally withdraw as Calhoun and the fire-eating rebels claimed), BUT arguably the right for states to let counties secede from their state is protected by the 10th Amendment. So VA letting those counties leave VA (but not the USA... after permission was granted by VA, the counties were technically territories of the USA), was constitutional... of course only if we accept the the legislature in the West claiming to be the legitimate VA government in exile.
As for the slave states, no state ever "left" the Union, despite what they claim. From 1860-1865 technically there were 11 (I'd also include KY as 12 because of their refusal to send the militia, holding a secession convention, and aiding rebel forces) states in open rebellion against the federal government and refusing to enforce the Constitution. There was no "reapplication" but rather legitimate state governments had to be reestablished under the rule of law in accordance with the Constitution, which after the 13th was ratified, required these states to write new constitutions acknowledging the abolition of slavery.
Then put down the "rebellion" and deal with the formation of another state after the rebellion. If rebellion is against the constitution two wrongs do not make a right.
I agree. The rebellion should be quashed. But our Resident and the federal government refuses to do it. Trump had all the power in the world to prevent it, just like Buchanan had all the power to crush the fireeaters in SC before their cancerous poison was allowed to spread... Jackson did it right destroying the Nullification Crisis in SC earlier. That was just a test run for 1860. Buchanan was willing to send an army to get the Mormons under control in Utah, but let the southern slavers run amok. Fast forward to 2020, and we saw a lot of the same, but at a much worse and wider level. Trump was POTUS. Lincoln wouldn't have put up with the shit that was allowed to go down...
West Virginia was formed illegally. If the states had no right to succeed then in no way did West Virginia have "consent of the legislatures of the states involved."
Article IV Section 3.
The admission of West Virginia was outside of the Constitution.
If you accept that West Virginia exists then you accept that the South had a right to leave the Union.
Bonus: The south did have that right because they had to "reapply" to reenter the Union.
Virginia was seceded from the US at the time even though it could be argued they did not have a right. Therefore it is a super gray area and the process to admit states from existing states was not needed to be followed due to the turmoil.
But the "reason for the war" was that stated didn't have that right even though we divorced England in The Declaration of Independence. The generals from West Point studied from a government textbook that proclaimed that right.
Actually, it was the Crown, first the Parliament and then the King, that abdicated rule in the Colonies by removing them from the protection of the Empire and making war on them as if they were enemy states. See the Prohibitory Act, John Adams and James Wilson.
The Declaration of Independence simply stated the reality that the colonies were already independent states, but now bound them together as a new nation with a confederated form of government. Up until July 1776, the Union had existed since 1774 but only in an economic sense while maintaining the claim of being loyal British subjects.
What happened in 1860, was in no way similar. 10 states attempted to steal an election and when they failed, they engaged in insurrection and rebellion, violating numerous parts of the Constitution. It was the culmination of over 6 decades of what I call the Dominos of Disunion Conspiracy, spurred on by Europeans intent on destroying the USA from within by causing division and chaos.
We supported Texas in their succession from Mexico. I need to find the name of the book that Generals like Lee et all studied at West Point that proclaimed succession as a right. You truly think that people that left a union the British Empire would lock themselves into an unbreakable union? That is very naive.
I personally agree that there is a right to secede but the North fought to keep the South and the South lost, and in reality we all lost shortly after with the DC Organic Act of 1871
Wait, so fi you say South did have a right to leave, then you are agreeing West Virginia was constitutional!
No winners write the rules and break them too. You can't say the south had no right to leave and break the constitution to add another state. End the rebellion and let Virginia sort out their problem.
My point flew over your head.
As did mine...
On its face the formation of WV was arguably unconstitutional. However, because VA was in a state if rebellion, and a legislature pledging loyalty to the Union was formed and relocated to the western counties, arguably when those western countries petitioned that legitimate government in exile to secede from VA, their request was granted. I agree that it was quite the legal gymnastics of process and I'm still a 50/50 of whether or not I can agree with the reasoning... it works, but only barely.
There is no constitutional right for a state to secede (let alone unilaterally withdraw as Calhoun and the fire-eating rebels claimed), BUT arguably the right for states to let counties secede from their state is protected by the 10th Amendment. So VA letting those counties leave VA (but not the USA... after permission was granted by VA, the counties were technically territories of the USA), was constitutional... of course only if we accept the the legislature in the West claiming to be the legitimate VA government in exile.
As for the slave states, no state ever "left" the Union, despite what they claim. From 1860-1865 technically there were 11 (I'd also include KY as 12 because of their refusal to send the militia, holding a secession convention, and aiding rebel forces) states in open rebellion against the federal government and refusing to enforce the Constitution. There was no "reapplication" but rather legitimate state governments had to be reestablished under the rule of law in accordance with the Constitution, which after the 13th was ratified, required these states to write new constitutions acknowledging the abolition of slavery.
Then put down the "rebellion" and deal with the formation of another state after the rebellion. If rebellion is against the constitution two wrongs do not make a right.
I agree. The rebellion should be quashed. But our Resident and the federal government refuses to do it. Trump had all the power in the world to prevent it, just like Buchanan had all the power to crush the fireeaters in SC before their cancerous poison was allowed to spread... Jackson did it right destroying the Nullification Crisis in SC earlier. That was just a test run for 1860. Buchanan was willing to send an army to get the Mormons under control in Utah, but let the southern slavers run amok. Fast forward to 2020, and we saw a lot of the same, but at a much worse and wider level. Trump was POTUS. Lincoln wouldn't have put up with the shit that was allowed to go down...