Posted on 11/21/2006 5:23:06 AM PST by SJackson
A classic. It sounds like lots of folks around here.
Since the right of Secession for Texas was agreed by TREATY, (with the Republic of Texas) I don't think the Supreme Court would have jurisdiction to overturn it.
Wrong again.
Texas came into the Union by TREATY. And that treaty gave rights that other states didn't have, and still exist today.
And Secession and the right to sub-divide as well.
Example: Texas retained ALL of it's public lands. The Federal Government owns only what it purchased from Texas, such as Ft. Hood,etc.
Nonsense. Half the territory of the United States was obtained by treaty. California and Vermont and Hawaii were all independent entities before joining with the U.S. Texas was admitted as a state, same as those three, and it has the same rights as every other state. No more and no less.
Example: Texas retained ALL of it's public lands. The Federal Government owns only what it purchased from Texas, such as Ft. Hood,etc.
So? So did Pennsylvania and New York and Virginia and all the other original states.
Sure they would. Article III, Section 2, Clause 1: "The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority..."
Wrong.
You had better check your sources.
Texas was it's own country from 1836 to 1845. Read the terms of the treaty.
By your explanation, apparently Texas got scr*wed, just like the Indians did.
I don't think that gives the Court the power to change the terms of a treaty AFTER THE FACT.
I have read the treaty of annexation, have you? And I can't see where it claims it retains the right to secede, unilaterally or otherwise. And even if it did, as a state Texas is subject to the same Constitution as the other states, and the right to unilaterally secede isn't in it.
If you call being forced to abide by the Constitution getting screwed.
If the treaty violates some provision of the Constitution, sure.
You have to read the actual terms , rather than the resolution passed by Congress. And I know that the terms are valid, because in 1973, the State of Texas tossed around the idea of subdividing.....it didn't fly with the voters.
I read the Treaty of Annexation, what are you reading?
And I know that the terms are valid, because in 1973, the State of Texas tossed around the idea of subdividing.....it didn't fly with the voters.
They would need consent of Congress before that could happen.
They can rule BEFORE hand that some provision doesn't fly perhaps, but if they did so after the fact, I would think that the treaty would be null & void, etc.
If that is the case, I need to let my accountant know NOT to pay my taxes to the Feds this year, but rather to the State of Texas, (or Republic of Texas perhaps :)
That would violate the separation of powers. The Senate has the power to confirm treaties made by the government. Only then can the Court review the treaty and rule on the Constitutionality. The Supreme Court cannot rule before hand that something is unconstitutional. They can only rule that some action violated the Constitution after the act was committed, and only if it is brought before them. You ought to know that by now.
If that is the case, I need to let my accountant know NOT to pay my taxes to the Feds this year, but rather to the State of Texas, (or Republic of Texas perhaps :)
Sure. And then maybe your lawyer can get you into the same prison Martha Stewart was in.
Read This:
Ordinance of the Convention of Texas, July 4, 1845
An Ordinance.
Whereas the Congress of the United States of America has passed resolutions providing for the Annexation of Texas to that Union, which resolutions were approved by the President of the United States on the first day of March One thousand eight hundred and forty five; and Whereas the President of the United States has submitted to Texas, the first and second Sections of the said Resolution, as the basis upon which Texas may be admitted as one of the States of the said Union; and Whereas the existing Government of the Republic of Texas has assented to the proposals thus made, the terms and conditions of which are as follow,
Joint Resolution For annexing Texas to the United States.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled That Congress cloth consent, that the territory, properly included within and rightly belonging to the Republic of Texas may be erected into a new State, to be called the State of Texas, with a republican form of Government, to be adopted by the people of said Republic, by Deputies in Convention assembled, with the consent of the existing Government, in order that the same may be admitted as one of the States of this Union.
2nd And be it further Resolved, That the foregoing consent of Congress is given upon the following conditions, and with the following guarantees, to wit:
1st Said State to be formed, subject to the adjustment by this Government of all questions of boundary, that may arise with other Governments, and the Constitution thereof with the proper evidence of its adoption by the people of said Republic of Texas, shall be transmitted to the President of the United States, to be laid before Congress, for its final action, on or before the first day of January, One thousand eight hundred and forty six.
Second. Said State when admitted into the Union, after ceding to the United States all public edeficies, fortifications, barracks, ports and harbors, navy and navy yards, docks, magazines, arms and armaments and all other property and means pertaining to the public defence belonging to the said Republic of Texas, shall retain all the public funds, debts, taxes, and dues of every kind which may belong to or be due & owing to the said Republic; and shall also retain all the vacant and unappropriated lands lying within its limits, to be applied to the payment of the debts and liabilities of said Republic of Texas, and the residue of said lands, after discharging said debts and liabilities, to be disposed of as said State may direct, but in no event are said debts and liabilities to become a charge upon the Government of the United States.
Third. New States of convenient size not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas, and having sufficient population, may hereafter' by the consent of said State, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the Federal Constitution. And such States as may be formed out of that portion of said Territory lung South of thirty six degrees thirty minutes North latitude, commonly known as the Missouri compromise line, shall be admitted into the Union' with or without Slavery' as the people of each State asking admission may desire. And in such State or States as shall be formed out of said Territory, North of said Missouri Compromise line, slavery or involuntary servitude (except for crime) shall be prohibited.
Now, in order to manifest the assent of the people of this Republic as required in the above recited portions of the said Resolutions; We the Deputies of the people of Texas in Convention assembled, in their name and by their Authority, do ordain and declare' that we assent to and accept the proposals, conditions and guarantees contained in the first and second Sections of the Resolution of the Congress of the United States aforesaid.
TH J. RUSK, President.
PHIL' M. CUNY ISAAC VAN ZANT
H. G. RUNNERS S HOLLAND
ROBERT M. FORBES EDWARD CLARK
SAM LUSK Geo' W. SMYTH
JN CALDWELL JAMES ARMSTRONG
JOSE ANTONIO NAVARRO FRANCIS M. WHITE
GEo M. BROWN JAMES DAVIS
GUTAVUS A. EVERTS GEORGE T. WOOD
LEMUEL DALE EVANS G. W. WRIGHT
J. B. MILKER H. R. LATIMER
R. E. B. BAYLOR JOHN M. LEWIS
J. S. MAYFIELD JAMES SCOTT
R. BACHE ARCHIBALD McNEILL
JAMES LOVE A. C. HORTON
Wm L. HUNTER ISRAEL STANDEFER
JOHN D. ANDERSON Jos' L. HOGG
ISAAC PARKER CHA S. TAYLOR
P. O. LUMPKIN DAVID GAGE
FRANCIS MOORE Jr HENRY J. JEWETT
ISAAC W. BRASHEAR CAVITT ARMSTRONG
ALEXANDER McGOWAN JAMES BOWER
ALBERT H. LATIMER H. L. KINNEY
Wm C. YOUNG WILLIAM L. CAZNEAU
J. PINCKNEY HENDERSON A. S. CUNNINGHAM
NICHOLAS H. DARNELL ABNER S. LIPSCOMB
EMERY RAINS JOHN HEMPHILL
A. W. O. HICKS VAN R. IRION.
JAMES M. BURROUGHS
Adopted. July 4th 1845
Attest
JA H. RAYMOND
Secretary of the Convention
CITY OF AUSTIN REPUBLIC OF TEXAS July 5th 1845
I certify the foregoing is a correct copy of the Ordinance as adopted and signed by the Members of the Convention on Yesterday, July 4th 1845.
JA H. RAYMOND
Secretary of the Convention
Let me point out that that was an act of the Texas government, not the U.S. government. I would also point out that Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1 states, "...no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
Texas could have split before admission. But once in they have to get the OK from Congress to do it.
And where is that secession clause again?
Those were conditions set by the Republic of Texas, so obviously the US Congress accepted them. I don't know where the secession clause is, but I will try to find it. Maybe in another document.
Actually no. Those were the conditions outlined in the treaty of annexation passed in April. Texas was actually accepting the conditions as passed by Congress.
TREATY? What treaty?
There was a simple joint resolution by the US congress spelling out what Texas had to do to be considered for admission to the Union. There was an ordinance as required by the Joint Resolution, passed by the Texas legislature agreeing to do all of those things which included a requirement that the people of Texas vote on admission as Congress required, followed by a vote (90% + approving) and then followed by an ACT of Congress officially admitting Texas as a state.
They were two Congressional actions by both houses of Congress but no treaties of any kind. Here is a link to all of the relevant documents.
You will notice that there is nothing in any of them about the Federal Government having to "purchase" land. In fact, they specifically require Texas to give deed to the United States all armories, forts and military stores required for the common defense. And there is absolutely nothing in the documents giving Texas any sort of "right" to secede at will.
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.