Posted on 06/24/2016 6:15:44 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
Hey, Texplainer: Britain voted to leave the European Union. Can Texas secede from the United States?
In the wake of Britain’s historic vote to leave the European Union - nicknamed "Brexit" - speculation of a Texit on the horizon have cropped up once again. The secessionist movement has a long history in the Lone Star state. Delegates for the Texas Republican Party even recently debated adding secessionist language to the party's platform. But is it actually legal for Texas to leave the United States?
Simply put, the answer is no. Historical and legal precedents make it clear that Texas could not pull off a Texit - at least not legally.
(Excerpt) Read more at wfaa.com ...
>>“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights”
Was held to establish that those rights are not granted by government but by the Creator. I know the Leftist pukes deny he exists, but that changes nothing.
The courts have no authority on those issues.<<
As the basis for the USC and the foundation document of the USA, the DOI is a critical document, arguably one of the most important of all human history.
But I see we agree you can’t bring it into a legal argument, except as a preamble to a legal argument when arguing “the spirit” of a law, legislation, and/or the USC itself.
As a practical matter, secession would be a difficult process full of messy details.
Suppose a state voted to secede from the union.
A vote would not be unanimous. It might be a strong majority, say 60% to 40%, but you would still have a huge number of people in the state who want to remain in the union.
Would that 40% minority be required to move out of their state, in order to retain their American citizenship?
What of matters such as that state’s share of the national debt? Would they be required to pay it off?
What about issues such as Social Security benefits paid for and earned by the residents of a state which was no longer in the union?
Would dual citizenship be allowed?
Would the state have to issue its own currency?
Would the state deny citizenship to people living in the state who were not born in that state, but were born in another state, or another country?
What about issues of military bases in the state, and provisions for military defense? Would the rest of the US have defense treaties with the state which secedes?
Will there be tariffs on trade between the rest of the US and the state which secedes?
This is just off the top of my head. All of these and more can be negotiated. Just saying, for a time, there would be a huge can of worms opened up, to make it all work.
“Any of the states can legally secede from the union.
Successfully resisting the inevitable military attempt to return the state to the union is another matter, however.”
Pish...
The present day U.S. government wouldn’t do anything but issue a string of strongly worded letters to any state that elected to secede.
Maybe. I dunno for sure. History was too long ago, and was never my best subject. I did however love to study the constitution and watch Perry Mason.
Excellent points and the reason why I say that intelligent adults negotiate, not saber-rattle.
>>Why would it be acceptable for an Estonia, Ukraine, Caledonia, Scotland, or Quebec to leave their unions, but not, say, a Delaware?<<
They are not part of the USA and governed by the USC AND they continue to operate as countries, just countries that have pledged fealty to an Emperor.
When a territory joins the US it says “this is now a State.” No more, no less than any other and the history becomes legally irrelevant. A country that joins the EU continues to be a country, it just promises to adhere to a bunch of rules and regulations shared by other countries.
“Can Texas legally secede from the United States?”
De jure? Yes. It would be constitutional and legal.
De facto?
It depends upon whether Nobama, a big fan of Lincoln, decided to wage all out war against Texas and whether the military would follow his dictates.
I remember hearing that in the late 1980s, when I was stationed in San Antone.
I believe that NY State, Illinois, and CA would all ultimately benefit if NY City, Chicago, and LA became city-states.
Just think NY state, you could be fracking right now and enjoying the economic benefits.
The state of Texas was negotiated into being.
You make a good point. I’m thinking there would not be military force used nowadays to force a state to stay in the union. We won’t know what would happen if a state tried to secede, until some state actually does so.
It will be interesting to see if secessionist movements gain traction in any states in the years ahead. So far there have not been any serious moves in that direction.
>>Any of the states can legally secede from the union.<<
I repeat: Under current federal law no State may legally secede.
>>I remember hearing that in the late 1980s, when I was stationed in San Antone.<<
A commonly repeated urban myth. Texas has no special status as a State.
>>De jure? Yes. It would be constitutional and legal.
<<
De Jure, No.
You obviously don’t “get it”.
No, absolute freedom has never been achieved. But we have come pretty close. And I still despise ever encroachment on my ability to live my life like I choose (harming no one).
So? Current federal law is irrelevant vis-a-vis the Constitution.
Straight from the NH Constitution:
[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
I don’t believe secession would necessarily result in armed conflict.
I’m not a lawyer. But I can read and understand what was written.
“unalienable Rights”
Not granted by Government at all, but not subject to removal by government.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.