- Joined
- Jun 28, 2006
- Messages
- 3,609
- Reaction score
- 1,100
- Location
- Oaxaca, Mexico
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
The united states is a voluntary union of free states.
If a state were to hold a vote of independence and vote to leave, they should be free to do so.
There is often talk of places like Puerto Rico voting to join the United States. If a nation can vote to join, does it not stand to reason that they be able to vote to leave?
Can a state legally, in your opinion, withdraw from the U.S.?
"When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States" -Chief Justice Salmon Chase 1869
" 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.
“The legality of seceding is problematic,” said Eric McDaniel, associate professor of government at the University of Texas at Austin. “The Civil War played a very big role in establishing the power of the federal government and cementing that the federal government has the final say in these issues.”
Many historians believe that when the Confederacy surrendered at Appomattox in 1865, the idea of secession was also defeated, according to McDaniel. The Union’s victory set a precedent that states could not legally secede."
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/06/24/can-texas-legally-secede-united-states/
The question was whether or not Texas could secede from the union legally. I don't agree that an invasion and conquest settles the question...legally. I don't question for a moment that Texas could not withstand an invasion by the U.S. government.
But, where in the Constitution does it say the federal government has the right, the authority, to prevent a state from withdrawing? Where does it say that the U.S. is like the Mafia and once you join you can never leave?
Can a state legally, in your opinion, withdraw from the U.S.?
" 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.
“The legality of seceding is problematic,” said Eric McDaniel, associate professor of government at the University of Texas at Austin. “The Civil War played a very big role in establishing the power of the federal government and cementing that the federal government has the final say in these issues.”
Many historians believe that when the Confederacy surrendered at Appomattox in 1865, the idea of secession was also defeated, according to McDaniel. The Union’s victory set a precedent that states could not legally secede."
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/06/24/can-texas-legally-secede-united-states/
The question was whether or not Texas could secede from the union legally. I don't agree that an invasion and conquest settles the question...legally. I don't question for a moment that Texas could not withstand an invasion by the U.S. government.
But, where in the Constitution does it say the federal government has the right, the authority, to prevent a state from withdrawing? Where does it say that the U.S. is like the Mafia and once you join you can never leave?
Can a state legally, in your opinion, withdraw from the U.S.?
Except it doesn't.Your civil war kinda debunks that theory...
They might have to leave the country of Texas if they wished to remain in the United States.that is another matter and creates problems in it self since the "states" are often have made up borders dictated by Washington back in the day. There could easily be parts that dont want too.. then what?
There is no legal process to join and no legal process to leave. If Canada held a referendum and voted to join the US, they would not instantly become the 51st state. Congress, I suppose, would have to authorize it. Likewise, if Texas voted to leave, congress would not likely go along. What would happen next is anyones guess. War is a possibility, but simply allowing them to leave seems a far better alternative.Puerto Rico is not a nation.. it is a colony. And there is no real legal process to join the US other than by conquest or acquisition.. both of which most states actually became part of the US.
Not without consent of the other states, or without a revolution, as held by the US Supreme Court in Texas v. White:
When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.
Not without consent of the other states, or without a revolution, as held by the US Supreme Court in Texas v. White:
When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.
Thanks for that. I will have to read the entire ruling when I get the chance. That said, the whole "perpetual and indissoluble' argument seems a bit thin to me and more opinion than anything that can be supported in fact
The South will not rise again.... get over it already
Sorry, the Civil War only settled the matter until it comes up again. Might doesn't make right, as the saying goes. Had Britain won the War of 1812, things would probably have been a lot different than now in what was then, and because we were not beaten still is, the USA.Your civil war kinda debunks that theory...
that is another matter and creates problems in it self since the "states" are often have made up borders dictated by Washington back in the day. There could easily be parts that dont want too.. then what?
Puerto Rico is not a nation.. it is a colony. And there is no real legal process to join the US other than by conquest or acquisition.. both of which most states actually became part of the US.
Thanks for that. I will have to read the entire ruling when I get the chance. That said, the whole "perpetual and indissoluble' argument seems a bit thin to me and more opinion than anything that can be supported in fact
No. The Civil War proved that.
The South will not rise again.... get over it already
It only proved Lincoln wouldn't let it happen. Would Obama or Hillary fight a civil war?
True. And Great Britain will never leave the EU.
Yeah, they would. And I'm betting the vast majority of American citizens would support it.
The South will not rise again.... get over it already
The vast majority of America won't support our soldiers fighting terrorists and you think they would supporting fighting Texas/the south?
There's no part in the Constitution that specifically prevents secession. However, the authority of who may decide if a territory may join the union is found in the Constitution in Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1: New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but 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.
This should be the same or similar procedure for a state to leave the union. In regard to Puerto Rico, they hold a plebiscite every 10 or so years regarding status. Each time they do, statehood gains more and more votes. So far, it hasn't gained a majority, however. Once it does, then the government of Puerto Rico will petition the Congress for inclusion in the union as a state under the authority of Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1.
I would imagine, that if a state had a vote of its citizens to leave the union, and Congress had a vote approving it, the state would be out of the union. Although, if there were certain counties that voted to stay in the union, they may could petition to be annexed by an adjacent state and by doing so stay within the United States. Regardless, it would be a serious mess.
"
Can a state legally, in your opinion, withdraw from the U.S.?
Nope. Texas v. White already settled this issue.
Where is this "vast majority"?
Are you talking about boots on the ground against ISIS?
It's a very different thing to be fighting a war thousands of miles overseas vs fighting a war to preserve your country at home.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?