Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

560

Most think that the civil war shut the case on whether or not it is legal to leave the union. What people fail to realize is that the legal basis for the war of northern aggression was not that the states didn't have a right to leave. Lincoln, at least by his own words was going to let them leave. The initial basis of the war is that you can't secede and then take over federal property, like Fort Sumter. As long as you don't do that then there isn't actually a precedent. If anything the precedent is that you won't be attacked for seceding as that was the case for the first few days of the secession.

Most think that the civil war shut the case on whether or not it is legal to leave the union. What people fail to realize is that the legal basis for the war of northern aggression was not that the states didn't have a right to leave. Lincoln, at least by his own words was going to let them leave. The initial basis of the war is that you can't secede and then take over federal property, like Fort Sumter. As long as you don't do that then there isn't actually a precedent. If anything the precedent is that you won't be attacked for seceding as that was the case for the first few days of the secession.

(post is archived)

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

If legalities mattered Hawaii would still be its own country.

[–] • 0 pt

Didn't Lincoln scheme to get the Confederacy to attack Fort Sumter? He may have hated secession no matter what, but he accidentally set the precedent you're discussing.

[–] • 0 pt

By most accounts, he sought to preserve the union. However, I often wonder what kike was in his ear and whether or not his assasination was a result of his secret intention to concede to the confederates.

[–] • 0 pt

Everything is legal, provided you don't get caught.