Good summary, but let me ask you about the reference to States Rights. Property rights granted to citizens are spelled out in the due process clause of the 5th Ammendment --
"nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

The right to hold slaves (and all other forms of property) was a Constitutional right given to citizens, not to states.

In 1860 (and earlier) States Rights meant the rights of the states in the territories. Southern leaders claimed that the territories belonged to all the states collectively. This meant that territories had no right to exclude slavery prior to statehood. A plank in the Democratic platform of 1860 and many previous campaigns maintained property rights of citizens (read slaveholders) in all U.S. territories.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/dem1860.asp

Southerners held to the Constitution as their primary shield and defense. In contrast Northern leaders often claimed a "higher law."
In a reversal of traditional positions, during the 1850s Northern states like Wisconsin in conflict with the Federal government claimed States Rights as their issue. Most Southern leaders claimed the rights of the government (which they controlled) overruled those of Wisconsin. See Forrest McDonald, States Rights in the Union, 1776-1876, pp 172-176.

After the war, the right of a state to leave the Union (States Rights) became a popular subject of debate.