So again, the issue has not been determined.
Sure it has been determined. Texas v White. State secession is considered unconstitutional.
Now would that stop Texas or California, or whatever State, from voting to secede from the Union? Of course not.
Just like if I want to discriminate based upon a person's disability, I certainly can. But that would be unconstitutional and unlawful therefore I would have to face the consequences of doing so.
If a State wants to secede, it is forbidden by the US Constitution as stated by SCOTUS, therefore, they would face the consequences, whatever they may be, of attempting to do so. Simple as that.
Whether you agree with that is neither here nor there. Your opinion doesn't matter. Just like my opinion doesn't currently matter against the SCOTUS recent ruling. Until such point I put forward a case to challenge that decision and the SCOTUS rules in my favor.
If you would like to change that, take it up with the courts. In the meantime, SCOTUS rules and you do not.
What I really want to know is why Thomas called out to revisit Obergefell and not Love? What's the difference? There's nothing in the constitution about marriage. If Thomas has his way, both should be revisited and tossed.