# Was the Confederate secession legal? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [March 3, 2015, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086 "2015-03-03T13:10:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/earl_snake-hips_tucker/32/3269_2.png) [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earl_Snake-Hips_Tucker)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/1 "2015-03-03T13:10:34Z")
[From 2008.](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/3207/was-the-secession-of-the-confederacy-legal) The column deals mainly with the fact that a) the rebellion was a failure, and b) the SCOTUS said it wasn’t legal in 1869. I think a better response to the question would have been how the SCOTUS would have likely responded if the case had gone to them in 1861, or earlier. I doubt that the result would have been any different from the 1869 ruling, but the citations would have certainly been different. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/2 "2015-03-03T14:32:15Z")
From wikipedia re: Prize Cases ruled 5-4 > [@](#): > > On March 10, 1863, the Court ruled that the states of the Southern Confederacy were in insurrection and at war against the United States by acts of belligerency on April 12 and April 17, 1861, to wit: the firing upon Fort Sumter and the Privateering Act proclaimed by Confederate President Jefferson Davis. If there can be any definitive answer, I believe it would come from reading that ruling and the dissents. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/3 "2015-03-03T18:11:20Z")
People guess at what the Supreme Court would do in a thousand hypotheticals threads. They have literally no meaning. Why would anyone purport to answer a factual question with a guess at a hypothetical case? The only answer is to look at a real case with a real decision. Anything else is pure entertainment. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/4 "2015-03-03T18:42:13Z")
Well the Prize Cases implied that the CSA were not a separate country hence the question of you can “blockage” your own ports. If secession were legal, then SCOTUS would have considered the CSA a separate country then they would have to decide on the legality of the timing. ---
**Author:** ![pool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pool/32/4152_2.png) [@pool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pool)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/5 "2015-03-03T18:48:44Z")
Well I’ve always heard at least in the case of Texas it was legal because it was written into their Constitution and also something like they never technically rejoined the Union. ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2015, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/6 "2015-03-03T20:04:27Z")
> [@pool](#): > > Well I’ve always heard at least in the case of Texas it was legal because it was written into their Constitution and also something like they never technically rejoined the Union. Nope. [Can Texas Divide Itself into Five Separate States? | Snopes.com](http://www.snopes.com/history/american/texas.asp) > [@](#): > > Another Texas-related legend holds that the Texans negotiated an annexation treaty which reserved to them the right to secede from the Union without the consent of the U.S. Congress, but the terms of Texas’ annexation contain no such provision. ---
**Author:** ![qazwart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/5fc32e/32.png) [@qazwart](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/qazwart)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2015, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/7 "2015-03-04T04:14:07Z")
Southern secession was ruled illegal in the famous case of Grant v. Lee. The South’s legal claim to succession rests upon the failure of the North to keep the Constitution which was a compact between states and that Constitution allowed slavery and required slaves to be returned if they escape. That the North wasn’t doing this meant the North _broke_ their compact with the Southern states. Thus, forcing the South to succeed. If anyone argues that slavery wasn’t a reason for succession should read South Carolina’s [Declaration of Succession](http://www.civil-war.net/pages/southcarolina_declaration.asp). It’s slavery all the way down. Even better, read [Texas’](http://www.civil-war.net/pages/texas_declaration.asp). I was going to boldface the _good parts_ but it’s all good parts: > [@](#): > > We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable. > > That in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states. Yup, race and slavery had nothin’ to do with it. ---
**Author:** ![Civil\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d78d45/32.png) [@Civil\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Civil_Guy)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2015, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/8 "2015-03-04T04:28:30Z")
Somebody’s got to do this. [Nitpick]It’s secede (and grammatical variations) as shown in the first paragraph, not succeed as shown in following paragraphs. As mentioned, the verdict of Grant v. Lee delivered at Appomattox Courthouse pretty much denied the South to any claim of having succeeded.[/Nitpick] ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2015, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/9 "2015-03-04T04:42:38Z")
Well, if the southern states felt compelled to succeed at their succession, they blew it. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2015, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/10 "2015-03-04T15:21:22Z")
Note that even the Confederacy explicitly refused to recognize the legal possibility of secession. Apparently they weren’t real big on consistency. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2015, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/11 "2015-03-04T16:32:35Z")
> [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](#): > > [From 2008.](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/3207/was-the-secession-of-the-confederacy-legal) The column deals mainly with the fact that a) the rebellion was a failure, and b) the SCOTUS said it wasn’t legal in 1869. > > I think a better response to the question would have been how the SCOTUS would have likely responded if the case had gone to them in 1861, or earlier. I doubt that the result would have been any different from the 1869 ruling, but the citations would have certainly been different. Depends on your point of view. To the states that seceded, it was legal. The rebellion was a success. A new country was formed. And then they fired on Ft Sumter. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2015, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/12 "2015-03-04T18:00:14Z")
Even if it’s legal from my point of view to punch you in the face, the courts are unlikely to see it that way. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2015, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/13 "2015-03-04T18:59:48Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Even if it’s legal from my point of view to punch you in the face, the courts are unlikely to see it that way. Depends on who wins the fight. If the CSA had won the war, would the secessions be considered legal? ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2015, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/14 "2015-03-04T20:28:25Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Depends on who wins the fight. > > If the CSA had won the war, would the secessions be considered legal? Not likely. It’s almost certain that the Supreme Court would still have ruled it illegal. The court relied on legal arguments to make their decision, not military reality. A victorious CSA would have escaped punishment for breaking the law, but you’d still have that precedent for the law of the remaining USA. If, say, Ohio later tried to secede, they’d have no legal grounds for it just because the CSA got away with it. (Just like I can’t commit rape and then say “But Roman Polanski got away with it!”) ---
**Author:** ![Find\_Friends](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c37758/32.png) [@Find\_Friends](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Find_Friends)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2015, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/15 "2015-03-04T20:55:10Z")
Since the first state to **threaten** to secede was New York State, I’d like some info on how the threat was received. For that matter, when the original states joined up, and a couple were reticent, was there discussion about whether and why the the decision would be eternaly binding? ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Tildrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e95f7d/32.png) [@Tom\_Tildrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Tildrum)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2015, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/16 "2015-03-04T21:11:08Z")
I seem to recall that there is an interesting question, separate from secession, about the legality of the formation of the Confederate government. If memory serves, the delegates who attended that meeting had no instructions or authority from their respective state governments to form such an entity, nor did the individual states ever ratify its formation. ---
**Author:** ![tim-n-va](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim-n-va/32/3001_2.png) [@tim-n-va](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim-n-va)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2015, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/17 "2015-03-04T21:22:29Z")
> [@dracoi](#): > > Not likely. It’s almost certain that the Supreme Court would still have ruled it illegal. The court relied on legal arguments to make their decision, not military reality. > > A victorious CSA would have escaped punishment for breaking the law, but you’d still have that precedent for the law of the remaining USA. If, say, Ohio later tried to secede, they’d have no legal grounds for it just because the CSA got away with it. (Just like I can’t commit rape and then say “But Roman Polanski got away with it!”) If the CSA had won - or even fought to a draw - with the end of the war being something that left the USA and CSA as distinct entities, the supreme court’s ruling would be irrelvent. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2015, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/18 "2015-03-04T22:18:09Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Depends on who wins the fight. > > If the CSA had won the war, would the secessions be considered legal? As both **Gfactor** and _Texas v. White_ note, if you _win the war_, then, sure, secession is “legal”. > [@the United States Supreme Court](#): > > The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration, or revocation, except through revolution, or through consent of the States. (Emphasis added.) Presumably, if the South had _won_, you would have both “revolution” _and_ likely “consent” (albeit consent under duress) from the remaining States, as there would have been some peace treaty ending the war whereby the United States recognized the independence of the Confederate States. (Similarly, the revolutionary and/or treasonous act of the Thirteen Colonies in declaring independence from Great Britain is legal even under British law, as Great Britain signed the [Treaty of Paris](http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?doc=6&page=transcript).) ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2015, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/19 "2015-03-04T23:22:43Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Note that even the Confederacy explicitly refused to recognize the legal possibility of secession. Apparently they weren’t real big on consistency. This needs some emphasis. I originally thought it wasn’t correct but Chronos is right. There was even an amendment brought up that would give states the explicit right to secede but it was dropped. So even in the Confederacy there was at least some ambiguity on whether secession was allowed. ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2015, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086/20 "2015-03-05T00:04:17Z")
Rebellion is always a crime, unless you win. That doesn’t make a cause just, it just means you win. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-the-confederate-secession-legal/714086.md?page=2)