No! I mean that it was a POLITICAL writing (actually not part of the decision) otherwise known as dicta from a man who had a very stron vested interest in getting what he said out there!
Obiter Dictum are comments made in a ruling that do not address the central issue before the court. The legality of the Southern secession was a matter before the court because the defense had claimed that since had seceded then the Confederate state legislature could sell the bonds in question. So the comments that secession required the consent of the states were not made in dicta.
No again! I just have a different opinion as to who get's to decide what constitutes and abuse of the compact.
Fair enough. Who does get to decide? And why?
On that we agree!
I doubt it will become a habit.
Who get's to decide what is a "negative impact" and where is any of that written in the Constitution?
That is a good question. If Texas were to walk out tomorrow, as many of you are suggesting, then she walks away from debt, treaty obligations, social obligations, and what have you. She would dump some of it, like the debt, on the remaining states and could also require the remaining states to continue to fund Social Security checks, federal pension checks, and things like that for Texas residents. Wouldn't you say that would have a negative impact on the remaining 49 states? Shouldn't things like that be negotiated prior to leaving?