To be fair on the matter, the test was declared illegal after the fact, thus anything based on that determination tended to skew the discourse a little. Sure, if at the time the test were definitely illegal then the south would have been without a doubt wrong in assuming control of Ft. Sumter, but, once they declared a secession it is my opinion that the occupation was illegal based upon the law at that particular time. This obviously is an opinion matter, but we have seen treaties, land holdings, etc. change hands over time.The secession test was irrelevant since it was not a legal test. The fort was certainly US territory. Your Gitmo example is inconsistent. If the property is leased, then it is not actually US property. If I lease a building, the building is not my property, but the property of the leaser. In the case of Ft Sumter, it WAS US property.