All very interesting. Until you remember Article VI Sec II of the Constitution, which is often referred to as the Supremacy Clause which states: when State law and Federal Law come into conflict, Federal Law prevails. So the Union viewed the Constitution as a binding contract, which Art.VI made it. The Confederate States viewed it as a "gentleman's agreement" that could be dissolved when one part felt wronged by the other. The rub to the Southern argument was that Art.VI was in the Constitution when their representatives signed it or when they were admitted to the Union. So clearly the South was in the wrong for secession and the firing upon Fort Sumpter. Regardless of what your unreconstructed Great Great Great Grand Pappy says.
If you start with a bad premise, you're bound to end up with a bad conclusion.
The supremacy clause only recognizes federal law that is in agreement with the constitution.
None of the federal actions were in accordance with the constitution.
