Did the eleven southern states have the constitutional right to secced? It was fought over states rights.....i

Question

It was fought over difference of interpertation of repersentation, the right to expand southern institutions into western territories, the unfair tariffs leveled at the southern states(uniform but nonetheless unfair), Federal denial of nullification doctorine, the leaders of the southern states believed that central government was created to serve the states not vice-versa. Our founding fathers 80 years earlier had just fought a war of secession against the British crown, because of an overbearing allpowerfull central government. That is why they had the forsight for checks and balances, electorial collge, and concurrent powers. Raymond Hartmann.

Answer 1

They believed they had the right to secede. The constitution doesn't address that issue. But they figured that since they had entered the union voluntarily, it followed that they would also have the right to withdraw voluntarily. Just like when you join a club, you can also resign when you want to. In earlier years, some of the northern states (including especially Massachusetts) had threatened to secede on certain occasions, so that the idea of a right to secession wasn't peculiar to the southern states.

Answer 2

Personally, I think the real motivation for secession was the protection of the institution of slavery. There are several statements from state secession conventions and the Confederate Constitution to support this claim.

Nevertheless, even though I find the Confederate cause to have been morally repulsive, I'm undecided on the right to secession. The question was "settled" by force of arms, and later by a stacked Supreme Court. Still, I don't accept military victory as a legitimate philosophical argument.

On the one hand, I think the people have a right to self-determination, which would support the right to secession (even if done for causes I disagree with.) On the other hand, joining the Union would have been a meaningless gesture had it been understood that membership could be withdrawn arbitrarily.

So I really can't decide. I can say that I am glad that some good came of the war, namely the 14th Amendment. Tyranny by the states is just as bad as Federal tyranny, in my opinion.

Answer 3

Your question was the very crux of the Civil War. The Constitution was silent on the issue and neither the Northern or the Southern States had any legal basis for their thoughts on the subject. The states who choose to secede believed that the very fact that it was not forbidden by the Constitution allowed them to leave the Union as they saw necessary. Meanwhile the Federal Government, still very small at this time, was of the opinion that once a state became a member of the Union it was a member in perpituity. It was in fact the war itself that answered the question, not the law, and to the victor goes the right to write the rules. As it stands now no state can secede from the Union; withe the exception of Texas that is, because Texas, when admitted to the Union made the stipulation that it could remove itself and declare Independence or split from one state into 4 at any time it's people decided one of those choices was a necessity. I hope this all helps.

Just my 2 cents worth

Answer 4

The Civil War was over slavery, pure and simple. Southern states brought up states' rights and the rest as an excuse to maintain the instituion of slavery - oh, 'scuse me, "Southern institutions" - and attempted to secede when legalistic arguments were failing, bringing about a war. This war decided both the issue of secession and the issue of slavery: once joined, no secession; no slavery.

Had these states faced the slavery issue decently and morally and worked out an expeditious and orderly discontinuation of slavery, the whole brutal business would have been avoided and everybody would have been better off, for all the problems that surely would have attended it.

Bringing up these ancillary side issues is just an attempt to paper over the basic impetus of the thing, just as it was at the time excuses for demanding the retention of slavery.

Answer 5

The southern states believed in compact theory of government. go back to days of the Articles of Confederation when the states were supreme and national government was weak.
Purpose of the constitution was give power to national government and make it supreme. Southern states dislike giving up power national government.

They read between the lines if state does not like al law or its enforcement they can defy the national government and not obey or leave the union. South Carolina attempted to leave the union over the tariff of 1828 and President Jackson forced them in obeying the laws of the land. No state can leave the union, if so we would not be nation today.

Answer 6

You bring up a good arguement. I think to some extent from the civil war on and with direct election of senators instead of having the state legislature pick their senators states have dissappeared. In fact the Anti-Federalist (people fighting against having the constitution ratified in the first place) were scared of this happening too.

Answer 7

No the truth is that it was fought over SLAVERY, cheap labor which saved MONEY. In fact all wars are fought over either MONEY or RELIGION or both. Everything else was just an excuse that could have been resolved had slavery not been an Issue.

Answer 8

Is there even a question there? Or just an essay.

The southern states thought they had the right to secede, the northern states didn't. The northern states won, so I guess they didn't have the right to secede.

Answer 9

It substitute into the thirty seventh Congress that had the genuine skill to attain this. and clearly they used it. in the process the Civil conflict the Legislative Powers and govt branch worked at the same time "... so as to sort a greater appropriate Union" and that they had the finished help of the Judicial branch in doing so. "IF" (huge IF) you surely need to comprehend the criminal and proper justifications for the Civil conflict then you could comprehend Article one million (Legislative Powers) of the form of america. and of direction you are able to learn relating to the Republican thirty seventh Congress and how and why they used those (their) powers.

Answer 10

The right to secede was ambiguous in the constitution. The winner got to decide how that ambiguity was resolved.

Why post the question twice, BTW?