The Declaration of Independence has the legal effect of declaring independent statehood of what had been British colonies. This is not merely a break from Britain, but a legal declaration recognizing the validity of the states wherein all of the states collectively recognize each other as valid. Unfortunately, legal scholars seem to hold the Declaration if Independence as having no legal effect under the Constitution. I believe they are wrong. While the Constitution may replace the Articles of Confederation, it does not replace The Declaration of Independence but, rather, builds on and, indeed, relies on it.
The Constitution does not declare the validity of the states. Instead, it accepts the states as already duly authorized, thereby recognizing the legal effect of the Declaration of Independence.
This is true throughout the entire Constitution from its first words. The preamble to the Constitution, a nonoperative clause, can only be seen as deferring to the legal effect of the Declaration of Independence in its opening line, "We the people of the United States." The Articles of Confederation declare the name "United States," following the lead of the Declaration of Independence, which refers to "the United States of America," but the Declaration of Independence is what gave them actual united independent statehood in substance, not just in name.
Ryan Larsen
Bountiful