Any law is the black ink on white paper contract between the Government and the People of what is acceptable conduct between those two legal bodies. It has nothng to do with what is Moral, or right. When that Contract can be suspended at the will of a single person outside of the rule of law, do you really have a country? Or is it just a sham.

That was the question that the southern states were asking in 1860. Did the Federal Government, by itself without the approval of Congress, have the right to suspend parts of the Constitution, which were not repealed until the passage of the 13th Amendment in 1865, after the southern states had been beaten into submission after four years of brutal war.

What we see here is that Lincoln had no problem with suspending the rights and of ownership of certain properties given under the agreed to Constitution of 1787. And that clause was not put into that Constitution solely for the benefit of the Southern States. If you want to find out who it was put into the Constitution to specifically benefit check out the State of New York, who did not ratify that NEW Constitution until AFTER it had become the Constitution of the new United States following the dissolution of the United States under the Articles of Confederation.