A terrible, terrible tragedy.

[Occhidiangela]

That would be fine, if these were powers not doled out by the consitution to the federal government. The authority for the state to supress insurrections and the responsibility for maintaining republican government are both explicitly granted to the Congress.

Yes, and much other power is encoded in statute. That doesn't make resisting unlawful government treasonous. It rather makes it pratiotic.

If the claim is that these powers devolve to the people themselves should the government fail in these responsibilities, then that's philosophy, not law,

Wrong, though half right, as it is a case of both philosophy and law. See 9th and 10th amendment.

My assumptions are that the constitutional powers the federal government has are its own to exercise, and that the only legal check is the constitution itself, as interpreted by courts.

There are some checks between Legislative and Federal, but yes, that's roughly right, for those powers so enumerated.

Nowhere does it say that the people have any right, within the law, to take these matters into their own hands through force. Except in New Hampshire.

The Constitution does not HAVE to say it, Jester, see again, 9th and 10th.

It's been nice chatting, as always.

-Jester

Likewise, consider a Guinness to be coming your way.:)

Occhi