The authorising authority was part and parcel to the change. Neither the paper nor the words written there are “the authority”, merely an expression of “the authority’s” will. Here in America, it’s “the people” who are the authority, their will expressed through “the states” and “congress” etc. by way of the electoral process. (How well that holds is debateable, but thats the ideal and that debate is off topic)
Nor do I need to cite anything that “changes that fact” because the articles were not higher in authority than the Declaration of Independence which founded this country.
Until your side is able to abolish or overthrow the United States and establish a country in its place under a new authority, none of your attempts to ignore the Rights and Responsibilities of citizens will be legitimate or carry the burden of honor.
It was legal, right and necessary for the Articles of Confederation to be abolished and a better system of government to be adopted in its place, the moment the better system becomes a hindrance to the Rights of the people it will once again be people’s Right and Responsibility to cast it off and try again.
All of those who live in the comfort of tyranny will protest but their cries will be no more relevant than the whining of Rhode Island over the abolishment of the Articles that you so lament.
Only as binding as the states at large were willing to accept. Just as no iteration of congress can bind subsequent iterations, even if they vote unanimously that their will be codified law until the heat death of the universe, the congress of states could not bind subsequent ones.
If more than 30 states today agree to abandon the constitution, the government falls. Period. It will cease to have any meaning, as it will no longer have “the consent of the governed”, even if twenty states really really really want to keep it and force the other states to continue to abide by it. The 20 states that want to keep it have that right, imho, but they will be clinging to failure, and will not be taken very seriously.
They “broke the law” when they declared independence from the British crown. So what? We have, in point of fact, 50 States in the union today and have had for 58 years now and 48 States for much of the 142 years prior to that.
They are not “binding” if they are destroying or violating the precepts of the Union that was established via the Declaration of Independence, those Principles are our highest authority unless the Nation they established is abolished and another takes its place.
The United States is a group of States, not a government; any manifestation of government that we try in any jurisdiction within the United States is subservient to the vision declared at our founding.
The tenth amendment is pretty plain. Any power not delegated to the federal government, nor forbidden to the states is retained by the states or the people. There’s no getting around the plain language. Nowhere is the power to compel continued membership delegated to the federal government, nowhere is the power to secede forbidden to the states. It says what it says, not what any black robed tyrant “interprets” it to say.
When you ask for that he just name drops “opinions” that are found nowhere in law and are usually “quoted” out of context.
It is the Right and responsibility of citizens to cast off any government that becomes an enemy to the perpetuation of the ideas that we were founded on; the idea that a wholly corrupt entity like the Supreme Court must give us permission to practice our Rights is a staple only the Extreme Left embrace.