The great political art of compromise

Being that the Union army won the war and occupied the states that seceded, I would point out that they did have authority at the point of a bayonet when that decision was made. They did recognize that revolution was also an option but it's hard to legalize revolution which by it's nature is illegal.
Elected vs. appointed judges give me no solace. A judge elected by the people can be just as tyrannical if not more so. That judge's power is at the whim of the people so legality goes to the majority. All the sheep would get eaten for lunch.
Finally, a union of states is kind of pointless if a state can secede every time a decision goes against it. But if it comes to that, I'm getting in the flag making business. Changing all those stars could be lucrative.
So that makes this a nation governed by conquest and force of arms rather than consent of the governed. Let's do away with that pretense once and for all. And on that basis, my assessment of the SCOTUS remains the same. Screw em.
 
So that makes this a nation governed by conquest and force of arms rather than consent of the governed. Let's do away with that pretense once and for all. And on that basis, my assessment of the SCOTUS remains the same. Screw em.
Since that decision was made, states have had the option to request to secede but none have made any serious attempts. Silence implies consent so it would seem the governed appear to be consenting to the rule of a federal government with a Supreme Court since the reconstruction period.
 
Top