Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Scalia vs. Thomas Jefferson on secession: Will nation 'submit to government without limits'?
WND ^ | November 14, 2012 | Bob Unruh

Posted on 11/14/2012 4:02:07 PM PST by Perseverando

Contemporary opinions, including those of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, say the idea of a state’s right to secede died with the hundreds of thousands of bloodied victims of the Civil War, and that the sentiment behind the dozens of petitions on a White House website seeking permission for most of the 50 individual governments to leave the union will be fruitless.

But historians would note that even Thomas Jefferson, a “pole star among political philosophers because he based his politics on the eternal, self-evidence, fundamental truths that all men are created free and equal and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inherent and unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” might be remembered for his opinion about states leaving the U.S.

It was in a letter to William B. Giles on Dec. 26, 1825, when Jefferson, who already had seen the fight over the states’ separation from England, the rise of a new nation and the tribulations it faced in its first decades, that he addressed the issue.

In a letter marked “not intended for the public eye,” he wrote that states “should separate from our companions only when the sole alternatives left, are the dissolution of our Union with them, or submission to a government without limitation of powers.”

He continued, “Between these two evils, when we must make a choice, there can be no hesitation.”

His letter, posted online at Constitution.org, sheds new light on the arguments being raised on the Obama administration’s online petition site, where dozens of petitions are seeking permission for virtually all of the states to leave the union.

The Blaze reported on a 2006 letter purporting to be from Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia that said, “There is no right to secede.

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: constitution; cw2; jefferson; scalia; scotus; secession

1 posted on 11/14/2012 4:02:17 PM PST by Perseverando
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Sadly, Lincoln killed the secession right. It is now, however, time to resurrect it; to breathe new life into it.


2 posted on 11/14/2012 4:04:53 PM PST by PubliusMM (RKBA; a matter of fact, not opinion. 01-20-2013: Still seeking change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PubliusMM

I don’t want states to succeed. I want certain counties ejected from the USA.

The deep-blue ones on the coasts.


3 posted on 11/14/2012 4:10:58 PM PST by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves" Month)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

Jefferson died long before 1865, so of course he is irrelevant to legal pragmatists like Scalia.


4 posted on 11/14/2012 4:11:35 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PubliusMM

There are too many frustrated Americans out there who want to divorce our government all together. I am one of them.


5 posted on 11/14/2012 4:11:39 PM PST by formosa (consider me galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER

secede


6 posted on 11/14/2012 4:11:47 PM PST by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves" Month)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PubliusMM
Secession, which is part-and-parcel to the right of self-governance, is a human right. It comes to us from god, or if you prefer, it comes to us by virtue of our existence as human beings. As a human right, it exists prior to and above the Constitution. As Jefferson so eloquently put it: "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."
7 posted on 11/14/2012 4:12:30 PM PST by altsehastiin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PubliusMM

“to breathe new life into it”

In the very least the threat of it, or the possibility of the threat of it, would be helpful.


8 posted on 11/14/2012 4:14:50 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

Let those states that wish to leave secede from the United States
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/228/644/059/let-those-states-that-wish-to-leave-seceed-from-the-united-states/


9 posted on 11/14/2012 4:17:05 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet (You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: altsehastiin

You’d be better off quoting the inalienable part. As in: the right to self-government cannot have been sacrificed by the states and a certain portion of the public 220-plus years ago because it is inalienable. That is, nontransferable.


10 posted on 11/14/2012 4:19:29 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

I think we need a form of economic secession with states themselves effectively going Galt.

Is it possible for a state to refuse to collect federal taxes for the feds? Lets say a Michigan company sells 100 tons of copper to a company that makes wire and copper sheeting while only collecting taxes for the state and local government.


11 posted on 11/14/2012 4:20:09 PM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I believe that the 10th Amendment needs to make a strong comeback, and that’s the way to go. States need to begin to force the issue.
The idea of secession is frightening. It is fun to think of sticking it to the federal government, but to do so while destroying a country that I dearly love is a high price to pay.


12 posted on 11/14/2012 4:26:25 PM PST by dmyhra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando
Contemporary opinions, including those of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, say the idea of a state’s right to secede died with the hundreds of thousands of bloodied victims of the Civil War, and that the sentiment behind the dozens of petitions on a White House website seeking permission for most of the 50 individual governments to leave the union will be fruitless.

Scalia is usually right, but he is wrong on this one. The "right" to secede is determined by facts on the ground, just like the "right" of military conquest. If one or more states secedes, and the federal government chooses not to stop them, or attempts to stop them and fails, then the states had the legal right to secede. As for a moral right or natural right to secede, see the Declaration of Independence.

Given the sudden changes, we are no longer a constitutional republic with a limited government constrained by enumerated powers. Our natural right to freedom overrides any legal limits that Scalia may believe are imposed by precedent, even by the precedent of the (first) Civil War. If one or more states secede, my guess is that they will eventually re-merge with the United States, once constitutional government is restored. My guess is also that Obama is so far from being Lincoln that even if Obama tried to force unwilling citizens of (for example) Texas to remain in the USA, Obama would mess it up and deepen the rift, probably pushing more states onto the same side as Texas.

13 posted on 11/14/2012 4:26:32 PM PST by Pollster1 (Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

Justice Scalia knows the terrible price that may have to be paid.

His heart is in the right place. But on this issue, he is wrong.

God Bless the man, he really does see the writing on the wall, and wants ONE MORE CHANCE to try and change it, without blood. Because after all, there is only one currency recognized in the “price of freedom.”

And that currency is blood.


14 posted on 11/14/2012 4:27:43 PM PST by ConradofMontferrat (According to mudslimz, my handle is a Hate Crime. And I just Hope they don't like it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

Bookmarked.


15 posted on 11/14/2012 4:31:43 PM PST by Inyo-Mono (My greatest fear is that when I'm gone my wife will sell my guns for what I told her I paid for them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConradofMontferrat

Every Founding Father believed in the right of secession. Lincoln’s War to Prevent Southern Independent, where three quarters of a million Americans died, settled nothing. What would King Obama do, send the US Army into Texas to slaughter more Americans and make them come back into his glorious union? The form of government the Founding Fathers wanted for this country has been systematically destroyed since Lee surrendered to Grant.
Does anyone with a brain think that any state would have voluntarily entered into a pac with the Federal government that said they did not have the right to leave that VOLUNTARY union if they saw fit? I don’t think so.


16 posted on 11/14/2012 4:41:11 PM PST by NKP_Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

I think just the opposite argument makes more sense, that expulsion from the union, not secession, should be the direction of the future.

And to put it into contemporary thinking, let’s look at the situation of Puerto Rico. For years, the Democrats have been trying to rig a vote there that would guarantee their acceptance into the US as the 51st State, and in a rather underhanded manner, made so by just a Democrat controlled simple majority in congress.

As things are going right now, they have just had their vote *asking* to become a state, with *very* little media coverage. So the time is ripe for the Democrats, at a time of their choosing, to create a new state without any Republican input. A Democrat state increasing their power in congress.

So what the Republicans need to do is to approach this situation from the point of view of, “What do the individual states need to do to expel a state from the union?” That is, to put “not yet a state”, Puerto Rico back on an even keel to approach statehood in a normal manner.

Importantly, this would help to establish some ground rules by which, say, 3/4ths of the states could resolve to expel a state from the United States.

Right now, I think the best candidate for expulsion is California. And, oddly enough, California might actually be amenable to the idea. Here are some of the rationales:

California could become a separate country, a one party state, with unlimited immigration, its own laws and regulations, and Californians could enjoy the fruits of their unique view of life and things.

About the only major changes would be that California would no longer participate in the national life of the United States, nor have to abide its laws, and that borders would be erected between California and Arizona, Nevada and Oregon.


17 posted on 11/14/2012 4:45:47 PM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy (DIY Bumper Sticker: "THREE TIMES,/ DEMOCRATS/ REJECTED GOD")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

Sadly, yes, the majority of Americans are content with surrendering all vestiges of liberty to a government that promises to shower largesse upon them.

They`re interested in beer, pot, tattoos, abortions, contraceptives, obamaphones, EBT cards, taxpayer-paid college, living in Mom`s basement, Obamacare, atheism/agnosticism and homo “marriage.”

Those of us who value liberty and the traditions that made this country the greatest in the world have been relegated to minority status.


18 posted on 11/14/2012 4:53:08 PM PST by ScottinVA (I've never been more disgusted with American voters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Amen Brother.


19 posted on 11/14/2012 4:56:18 PM PST by ConradofMontferrat (According to mudslimz, my handle is a Hate Crime. And I just Hope they don't like it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando
"Scalia wrote, in response to a question about a hypothetical secession movement, the U.S. can’t even be sued over the issue without first granting permission, which would not happen anyway."

Bullets beat paper.

I do not need nor require the gov'ts permission to pursue life,liberty and happiness. If they hinder that pursuit it is my duty to fight back through any means necessary up to and including force.

Impeach the kenyan or secession.


20 posted on 11/14/2012 4:56:37 PM PST by ex91B10 (We've tried the Soap Box,the Ballot Box and the Jury Box; ONE BOX LEFT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

I thought Scalia was an originalist; that is the belief that the U.S. Constitution should be interpreted according to the intent of those who composed and adopted it ... and the founders were silent on secession. The guns were not silent, and if that war were fought today, the north would lose.


21 posted on 11/14/2012 5:01:07 PM PST by alphadog (2nd Bn. 3rd Marines, Vietnam, class of 68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: alphadog

the north would lose.

Provided the soldiers quartered here chose to fight for the states and not the feds.

Not sure it would be a north south battle...more like a Northeast/West coast vs the rest of us. But your main point is well taken.

It says We the People of the UNITED states. Should the states become disunited...as they almost were in 1810-ish and later in 1860,why should they not choose to leave.

However, if states were serious, they could start by telling the feds they were not taking the money and not following their “regulations”

I do not see anything close to that beginning to happen.


22 posted on 11/14/2012 6:06:45 PM PST by Adder (Holy Crap! Now what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: alphadog
I thought Scalia was an originalist; that is the belief that the U.S. Constitution should be interpreted according to the intent of those who composed and adopted it ...

He is, except when he's not. He gave full-throated endorsement to the expansive Commerce Clause so fedgov could outlaw medical marijuana.

23 posted on 11/14/2012 6:55:39 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER

We can “seceed” from the federal gravy train by starting a movement in all of the red states and red counties or red towns. We can refuse to take federal money by cutting back on anything that the federal government gives us such as housing or anything else that Lyndon Baines Johnson thought up in his diabolical Great Society program. We have to roll back on anything that involves federal money and return to a slimmed down government.

No federal programs in our towns and states means that there will be far fewer federal employees who are the power source of the Democratic party machine. Democrat bureacrats give money to their bosses, must answer to their bosses if they should forget to vote and are required to hold signs and work to get out the vote. That is why they have such a huge organization which allows them to bring so many people to the polls. If there were far fewer government workers in our communites, there would be less of a Democrat Party presence in our communities. This is how we have to starve the beast of the Democrat party machine.


24 posted on 11/14/2012 9:29:13 PM PST by cradle of freedom (Long live the Republic !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando
The Blaze reported on a 2006 letter purporting to be from Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia that said, “There is no right to secede.

No, not since the States gave up their militias in favor of a standing federal army, along with other sovereign powers.

25 posted on 11/14/2012 9:50:35 PM PST by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perseverando

states have the power to secede from the union... it is up to the people to defend and protect that power through fighting... in 1865 the union won... but did not eliminate the power of a state to seceded.

the resolve to dissolve will be the factor. resist we much.

teeman


26 posted on 11/15/2012 7:20:25 AM PST by teeman8r (Armageddon won't be pretty, but it's not like it's the end of the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConradofMontferrat

And that currency is blood of tyrants.

there. fixed it.

teeman


27 posted on 11/15/2012 7:22:35 AM PST by teeman8r (Armageddon won't be pretty, but it's not like it's the end of the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson