Mr. Almon, I believe your statement "Lacking any actual legal authority to overthrow the Articles of Confederation" is in error. A majority of states gave commissions to their delegates of the 1787 constitution convention that included authority to do what was necessary for the "exigencies" of the Union. For a historical and scholarly confirmation of this, please read the published Harvard Law paper by constitutional lawyer Mike Farris. I can also send you excerpts of the actual commissions if you like. The commissioners were acting under the authority given to them by their respective states. https://journals.law.harvard.edu/jlpp/wp-content/uploads/sites/90/2017/03/Farris_FINAL.pdf
I'm not a lawyer or a constitutional scholar, but the way I understand it, neither the states nor the delegates had that authority under the Articles. To that point, they didn't have technical legal authority to rebel against King George and Great Britain either, but they did, and good for them!
The bigger picture, in my opinion, is that the Framers did what they believed was right, and let history be the judge.
But to say that they acted without authority actually gives credence to anyone who disagrees with the governing authorities; those very folks who you are rightly pointing out in this article. Without a foundation of authority to act, an element of anarchy exists and that simply was not the case with our founders. The elements of the tyranny of the demos is what you are rightly pointing out, but to liken that activity to the authority our founders used to establish this country is misguided. It technically allows an "out" to anyone who wants to step outside the boundaries of the current legal framework.
Yes, it was “we the people” but it happened because the Colonies/States gave the authority to their respective representatives to create our Constitution to become a far better government document of laws “by the people for the people” where the Article of Confederation government was grossly inadequate.
I agree! The ratification vote numbers I mentioned show how close a thing it was in the end. But I'm glad the Framers did what they believed was best for our country.
It is a hard pill to take when one learns they are outnumbered. Instead of believing "...any loss or setback is solely due to cheating, fraud, or other such shenanigans," and not the fact that your side didn't have the votes is difficult. Thus, many are resolved to leave blue state strongholds and move to red state havens. However, they discover the battle never ends, and those havens have the potential of shrinking.
Mr. Almon, I believe your statement "Lacking any actual legal authority to overthrow the Articles of Confederation" is in error. A majority of states gave commissions to their delegates of the 1787 constitution convention that included authority to do what was necessary for the "exigencies" of the Union. For a historical and scholarly confirmation of this, please read the published Harvard Law paper by constitutional lawyer Mike Farris. I can also send you excerpts of the actual commissions if you like. The commissioners were acting under the authority given to them by their respective states. https://journals.law.harvard.edu/jlpp/wp-content/uploads/sites/90/2017/03/Farris_FINAL.pdf
I'm not a lawyer or a constitutional scholar, but the way I understand it, neither the states nor the delegates had that authority under the Articles. To that point, they didn't have technical legal authority to rebel against King George and Great Britain either, but they did, and good for them!
The bigger picture, in my opinion, is that the Framers did what they believed was right, and let history be the judge.
But to say that they acted without authority actually gives credence to anyone who disagrees with the governing authorities; those very folks who you are rightly pointing out in this article. Without a foundation of authority to act, an element of anarchy exists and that simply was not the case with our founders. The elements of the tyranny of the demos is what you are rightly pointing out, but to liken that activity to the authority our founders used to establish this country is misguided. It technically allows an "out" to anyone who wants to step outside the boundaries of the current legal framework.
Yes, it was “we the people” but it happened because the Colonies/States gave the authority to their respective representatives to create our Constitution to become a far better government document of laws “by the people for the people” where the Article of Confederation government was grossly inadequate.
I agree! The ratification vote numbers I mentioned show how close a thing it was in the end. But I'm glad the Framers did what they believed was best for our country.
It is a hard pill to take when one learns they are outnumbered. Instead of believing "...any loss or setback is solely due to cheating, fraud, or other such shenanigans," and not the fact that your side didn't have the votes is difficult. Thus, many are resolved to leave blue state strongholds and move to red state havens. However, they discover the battle never ends, and those havens have the potential of shrinking.