cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1997-08-13 - Re: A peculiar notion

Header Data

From: “Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law” <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
To: Steve Schear <azur@netcom.com>
Message Hash: 9db14daaa3cbb864d54c9f4ca025ea55ec30531ff18118df8fe0a3f582e39111
Message ID: <Pine.SOL.3.95.970812220443.14307C-100000@viper.law.miami.edu>
Reply To: <v03102809b0162dabfc26@[10.0.2.15]>
UTC Datetime: 1997-08-13 02:14:51 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 10:14:51 +0800

Raw message

From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 10:14:51 +0800
To: Steve Schear <azur@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: A peculiar notion
In-Reply-To: <v03102809b0162dabfc26@[10.0.2.15]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.95.970812220443.14307C-100000@viper.law.miami.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Tue, 12 Aug 1997, Steve Schear wrote:

> So, if the people (legal voters in the states which planned to withdraw)

No, "the people" is the people of the united states as a whole.  The
federalist papers deals with this somewhere, where they explain that of
course the voting had to be organized state by state, because that tracked
the reality of how everything was organized, but nonetheless it was
intended to be a national pleblecite to produce a national government.

> had called a constitutional convention, whose vote was for withdrawl, it
> might (in your opinion) been a legitimate undertaking with binding result?

No. see above.
> I don't think the North would have accepted any withdrawl, not matter how
> it was decided within the South.

right.

[...]

A. Michael Froomkin        | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)
Associate Professor of Law | "Cyberspace" is not a place.
U. Miami School of Law     | froomkin@law.miami.edu
P.O. Box 248087            | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/
Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's @%#$%$# hot here.

Thread