Talk:Article Seven of the United States Constitution

Removed section
I have removed the following section from the article: "Secessionists have used Article VII to argue that states have a right to secede from the Union by revoking their ratification of the Constitution.

Virginia's ratification of the Constitution declared that, "the powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the People of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression." New York and Rhode Island's ratifications likewise declared that, "That the powers of government may be reassumed by the people, whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness." The New York Convention also contemplated going a step farther, adding language to the effect that "there should be reserved to the state of New York a right to withdraw herself from the union after a certain number of years." The Madison federalists opposed this, with Hamilton, a delegate to the convention, reading aloud in response a letter from James Madison stating: "the Constitution requires an adoption in toto, and for ever" [emphasis added]. Hamilton and John Jay then told the convention that in their view, reserving "a right to withdraw [was] inconsistent with the Constitution, and was no ratification". The New York convention ultimately ratified the Constitution without including the "right to withdraw" language proposed by the anti-federalists.

At the start of the Civil War, four of the original thirteen states seceded from the Union, South Carolina, Georgia, Virginia, and North Carolina. In their ordinances of secession they declared that their newly elected conventions were repealing the acts of the previous conventions ratifying the Constitution. Abraham Lincoln maintained that secession was unconstitutional, and ultimately these States along with the other Confederate States were defeated."

This was "Revoked ratification" section, which discussed the idea of a State seceding from the Union by repealing or "revoking" its ratification of the Constitution. This section provided no sourcing for its premise (see its first sentence) and has insufficient for the rest of what it says. Unless sufficient reliable sourcing is provided, this section should not be in the article. SMP0328. (talk) 02:47, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I think this section should be re-added. However, the first sentence can be deleted.  I believe that the rest is adequately sourced.  I cited to the ratification instruments themselves for the statement that several States claimed a right to revoke ratification when they ratified.  The next several sentences were borrowed from the article on Secession in the United States.  If those sentences were adequately sourced for that article then they should be for this one as well.  Finally, I cited the ordinances of secession themselves for the statement that those States were repealing their ratifications of the Constitution.  Emperor001 (talk) 19:05, 29 October 2019 (UTC)