Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

26

The United States Supreme Court ruled unilateral secession unconstitutional while commenting that revolution or consent of the states could lead to a successful secession NOTE: The Supreme Court ruling was after the Civil War Legality: The principle of legality is the legal ideal that requires all law to be clear, ascertainable and ...


22

As far as Union states go, this table seems to provide accurate information. However, the info on Confederate army is very incomplete. You can find statements that North Carolina supplied the most soldiers (125,000) to the Confederate army all over the Internet. The original source seems to be a speech from 1904 by Hon. Theodore F. Davidson in Raleigh: ...


13

Besides the battle losses, the period around the battle of Gettysburg had two important strategic effects. 1) It established the winner, George G. Meade, as the General of the army of the Potomac. 2) More to the point, it established U.S. Grant, who captured Vicksburg at about the same time as Meade's boss. The Army of the Potomac began the 1864 campaign ...


12

Gettysburg was pretty much a last ditch effort by Lee and Jefferson Davis to save the Confederacy or at least give it some credibility. There were different objectives that led to the attack in the first place. For one thing, the war in the West was going against the Confederates, and if the West fell, and more importantly access to the Mississippi River, ...


7

In 2 court rulings this century the pre civil war secession situation was described as either unresolved or unsettled, not illegal nor unconstitutional. In 2004 the SCOTUS observed that inclusion of the word “indivisible” in the Pledge of Allegiance was significant because “the question whether a State could secede from the Union had been intensely ...


6

There's nothing in the Constitution specifically allowing it. The closest any part really comes to addressing seccession is the following (from Article 4, Section 3): Section. 3.New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by ...


6

In June 1864, as General (later President) Ulysses S. Grant was leading the Army of the Potomac against Richmond, Lee DID order an offensive by one of his better remaining subordinates, General Jubal Early. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jubal_Early Early debouched from the Shenandoah Valley, cut a swath across Maryland and southern Pennsylvania, and ...


5

My cynical reasoning is that it's illegal because the pro-union side won. Laws are often changed and legal justification can be found for most things after or before the fact. Legal experts are rarely 100% in agreement in everything (even now, supreme court judgement have various different opinions). Sometimes people ask these questions because they equate ...


5

Chickamauga in September, 1863 was also a major tactial victory for the Confederates, although due to inadequate resources and command controversies they were unable to sustain the campaign and change the strategic outcome in the western theater. Interestingly, James Longstreet, the commander of Picket's charge, was sent west with his troops after Gettysburg ...


5

Consider the strategic situation. The South was losing. The Mississippi was Union-controlled except around Vicksburg (until Grant took it too), cutting off a good chunk of the Confederacy. The Union blockade was in effect, making it very difficult for the Confederacy to trade abroad. The Emancipation Proclamation had made it politically impossible for ...


4

My answer is similar to E1Suave's, but my interpretation is different. Texas v. White, 1869, explicitly addressed this issue. The US Supreme Court ruled that the Texas secession of 1861 was unconstitutional, and had never been valid. The ruling was based on the US Constitution (not on any amendments ratified after 1861). According to the ruling, ...


3

After Vicksburg and Gettysburg, the Confederacy had little hope of an ultimate military victory over the Union army. Their best remaining hope was for a political victory. They nearly achieved it. Grant's Overland campaign was very bloody, and closely covered by journalists (who had some antipathy toward General Meade). The subsequent siege of Petersburg ...


2

After forces were drawn off in the autumn for 1863 for Chickamauga and Chattanooga - Longstreet's corps for the south, and the XI and XII corps for the north, Lee again tried to turn the Army of the Potomac and win a victory. Meade was too deft, and after Lee suffered a severe check at Bristoe Station the two stood back at the Bull Run battlefield. Lee ...


2

Just to back up Wladimir's post of the inaccuracy of the numbers. Josh Howard a North Carolina Historian stated in this article "The time has come to get it right," said Josh Howard, a research historian with the Office of Archives and History in Raleigh. "Nobody has gone through man by man looking for the deaths." North Carolina is only believed to ...


2

The US Constitution applies only to the territory within the US. If a state withdraws from the union it no longer is obligated to comply with the demands of said constitution. "Legality" is in the eye of the beholder or rather the entity that prescribed the law. Those laws no longer apply to a withdrawn state any more than they do to an African nation.


2

The 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. The power to secede was not granted to the Federal government. Therefore, it is reserved for the States. Well it seems that the power to be the United States is delegated ...


2

I had originally answered yes; then I discovered the force bill. Section 5 of the force bill permits the President to use whatever force is necessary to preserve the Union. The US Congress had considered seccession, and explicitly authorized the preservation of the Union by military force. UPDATE: @Garrett Albright asks a pertinent question. I grant you ...


2

It is simple, secession was and is legal. Look to the ratification documents from Rhode Island, New York and Virginia, three of the last four to ratify the Constitution. They state specifically, that the State can reassume the powers delegated through the ratified Constitution by the State in cases where they feel they are being injured or abused. This is ...


2

Reconstruction was dead in some states almost as soon as it started, and it was completely undone nationwide by the compromise that led to the election of Rutherford B. Hayes as President in 1876. The lasting social damage that the song talks about should more accurately be associated with the demise of Reconstruction. Here are some legacies of the time ...


2

We can go into these long winded discussions on Supreme Court decisions and the law about secession. A document that is more important than the Constitution is being overlooked. The Declaration of Independence. Does this not give a state the right to break away from a government that has become destructive to the people. What did we do when be declared ...


2

The secession of the southern states was a violation of Section 10 of the US Constitution, to which all of those states had agreed. That part of the Constitution reads: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; .. By creating the Confederacy, they obviously were breaking this clause of the constitution to which they had ...


1

No its not legal they did not gain permission to secede and so thus they broke the law if they were to secede they would have had to go through several different courts and several different government actions would have to happen. They illegally withdrew from the u.s. and they had to pay the consequence for there actions.


1

Of course secession is legal. The only way that states join the United States is via a ratification of the Constitution in which they VOLUNTARILY agree to join. Therefore, if they later reject that Constitution ("un-ratify" it, if you will) then they are no longer bound by its laws. Secession is simply that process of rejecting the original ratification. ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible