The Civil War South did not have the legal right to secede from the Union.

As agreed upon, this will be my last round of debates. My opponent claims “the Union preceding the states”However, The Union did not precede the States, the Union only has power because of the states. In fact making a claim such as that made by my opponent is Historically ignorant. Since the colonies first formed they were separate from each other. Then even when they formed into states they still were considered separate but united for a common cause, they even had separate militia. The federal government was only formed when the states got together and decided they needed a small central power to deal with interstate issues but the states retained the majority of the power. My opponent brings up Article VI, Paragraph 2 and Article IV, Section 4 as examples of where the power comes from the Federal Government as opposed to the states. Let’s take a look at them. Article IV Section 4 just states that the federal Government has the right to provide protection to the states, but nowhere does it say that this power originates in the Federal Government. Article VI Paragraph 2 states that elected representatives are bound to support the Constitution and that no religious test should be required for office, again no mention of this power originating from the states. I must point out the distinction between the duty of the Federal government and something originating from the federal Government. If anything it shows how said elected officials would be obligated to oppose any Unconstitutional laws the Federal Government tries to force on them. In his argument against the legality of secession, he quotes Article I, Section 10 which does states that the States cannot form a Confederation. However that was not the premise of the debate, it was if the states had a right to secede not if they had a right to join a Confederation and I repeat, this section says nothing about secession. Now, since the states seceded they were free to write a new Constitution, one that established a Confederation. It is true my opponent mentioned Madison and Lincoln as dissenters from the idea, however, Lincoln came later and as I mentioned, he actually supported secession before he opposed it. He states in 1848 “Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better.”. It seems he flip flopped on this issue. [1] Madison did dissent, but much of his dissent was moderated. Jefferson's for one called Nullification the “rightful remedy” and even referred to the states as “sovereign and independent”. That is a pretty strong statement and one that is hard to ignore if you argue that the Federal government is the source of the states’ power. [2] My mention of the Kentucky resolution and the response to the Alien and sedition acts are relevant because they point to early talks about nullification and it even resulted in a cal for secession by Jefferson. [3] I am not entirely sure what my opponent is getting at in response to my third paragraph. My concession of his point was that the Bill of rights were meant to limit Federal government and were the only way the ant-federalists would sign. George Mason of Virginia believed that secession was a process in the same way as joining the union in the first place was and so he pushed for it to be allowed [4] Lincoln’s claim of it being anarchy was a misrepresentation of the term as each state would still maintain their own government. When it comes to “more perfect Union” we cannot just assume that means a National government superseding the states. We must look at what was intended by those words. My opponent also again claims this shows how the Federal government supersedes the States, and I have already proved why that is incorrect, particularly “chronologically”. Besides if my opponent going to make that argument then he must admit that people precede Union. My opponent wonders what I meant in saying that the Supreme Court is Biased In claiming this, it was not my intention to completely deny the validity of the court, it is certainly true that the Court has the final say in matters of legality and Constitutionality. However we must also consider cases of judicial activism Would my opponent consider Dred Scott a fair ruling? If so how does the court justify later cases that counter that ruling? Or how Plessy v. Ferguson was overturned by Brown v. Board of Education. The court often counters former rulings, proving that they are not an infallible arbiter. The Supreme court is only meant to deal with things at the Federal level and not the State level. Every time they decide a state issue they have exceeded their own. This also relates back to my point about bringing up Nullification. Every time the Supreme court rules on a case outside their jurisdiction the states are duty bound to Nullify it. If it infringes on their sovereignty as state to a point that they would be better off seceding, then they should. I now need to prove why the two cases my opponent brought up are instances of judicial activism. McCulloch v. Maryland That was a case that started the trend of a more progressive interpretation of the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson even accused Chief justice John Marshall of Judicial activism. Up until that point the Necessary and Proper clause had been only applied to those powers already explicitly delegated. Texas v. White is not really applicable anyway as it was decided after the end of the Civil war and a decision cannot be retroactive and my opponent’s resolution was specifically about the Civil war. The South felt violated because the North was demonizing them and issuing tariffs against them (sort of like those issued against the colonies by Britain). They were oppressed and therefore they had the Revolutionary mentality. [5] I thank my opponent and I await his closing rebuttal. 1 http://www.brainyquote.com...2 http://www.finestquotes.com...3 http://muse.jhu.edu...4 http://muse.jhu.edu...5 http://www.capitalisminstitute.org...