Secession

[Yurt]

a discussion about a very real political and historical issue in america

 

[Avatar4321]

Im not sure what your asking with the poll. Are you asking whether its an option? Whether its legal? Whether its right? what?

 

[DavidS]

It's illegal.

Texas v. White - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869) was a significant case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869. The Court held in a 5–3 decision that Texas had remained a state of the United States ever since it first joined the Union, despite its joining the Confederate States of America and its being under military rule at the time of the decision in the case. It further held that the Constitution did not permit states to secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null".

 

[PoliticalChic]

a discussion about a very real political and historical issue in america

Although the question is moot, as indicated by the Supreme Court Decison re: Texas, the original entry of Texas into the union is the reason that the question arose.

The difference between Texas' admission and other states is that it was based not the usual course of admission, which is treaty, (a treaty meant two-thirds concurrence by the Senate, and this had resulted in a stalemate due to opposition of abolitionists), but by joint legislative resolution, which entailed a simple majority.

Thus, some have suggested that Texas' admission was unconstitutional. This was adjudicated to be not the case.

I recommend the book "Polk," by Walter Borneman, which covers this thoroughly.

 

[American Horse]

It's illegal.

Texas v. White - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869) was a significant case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869. The Court held in a 5–3 decision that Texas had remained a state of the United States ever since it first joined the Union, despite its joining the Confederate States of America and its being under military rule at the time of the decision in the case. It further held that the Constitution did not permit states to secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null".

Texas v White, a U.S. Supreme Court case decided in 1869, said Texas cannot secede. The court did allow some possibility of the divisibility of the Union in the following statement:

"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."

 

[Xenophon]

It's a bad idea.

 

[jillian]

Not a bad idea... insane.

again, a bunch of sore losers whining.

we tolerated bush for eight years... no one said "we don't want to be americans anymore".

i am so losing patience with this silliness.

 

[strollingbones]

lets discuss it on a reality farm..first lets take nc...we leave the union...now can we still cross into tn, va, sc, ga without papers? are we to have our own army? currency?

lets look at the french canadian problem....each vote...is just by a few percentages where they vote not to leave...well fuck em....kick their frog asses out...make them fund their own currency...their own army etc....now note when they vote to leave they do not vote to give up all the benifits of being in canada...so why do they vote...they piss and moan and get money....you would not believe the advantages of being french....student loans...have you a little frenchie baby and loans are forgiven....on and on....have so many kids get this and that...free fucking vacation and no hell i am not making this up
but i digress...

i would allow separation as long as it was total just like another country

 

[WillowTree]

unintended consequences of voting a marxist in.. perhaps..

 

[WillowTree]

and if you libtards put every nasty thing you ever said about right wing nutters in a book and read it you would realize you really don't want to live with us anyways..

 

[KittenKoder]

What was that about the "he started it" comment one right leaner said in another thread?

Oh yeah, "it's childish".

 

[Gunny]

What was that about the "he started it" comment one right leaner said in another thread?

Oh yeah, "it's childish".

We'll keep this one, bearing in mind my comments earlier in Admin. This thread stays legit or posts get moved.

 

[AVG-JOE]

The question is not would secession be 'legal'...

The real question is: Would any American leader have the stones to order the military to shoot the rebels?

Alaska has the best shot at leading the way... unfair taxes and unreasonable demands, with no resources to implement them, in the vein of 'No Child Left Behind' or unfunded health-care entitlements would be the most likely catalyst.

-Joe

 

[Gunny]

It's illegal.

Texas v. White - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869) was a significant case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869. The Court held in a 5–3 decision that Texas had remained a state of the United States ever since it first joined the Union, despite its joining the Confederate States of America and its being under military rule at the time of the decision in the case. It further held that the Constitution did not permit states to secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null".

The fact is, you are only partially correct. One thing jury duty will learn you, is the rules.

The decision reached in Texas v White was based on nothing but unsupported assumption. The Supreme Court rendered a decision based on supporting the actions of the US in the then-recent US Civil War.

The fact is, NO language in the US Constitution precludes states leaving as freely as the they entered.

If you google jury nullification, the Supreme Court and judiciary and genral have conspired to keep the people ignorant of their rights. Most states, to include mine, make you swear an oath to consider only the evidence presented in court, and/or the directions of the judge. That's bullshit, plain and simple.

The jury/juror has EVERY right to judge the law as well as the accused. All it would take is an act of jury nullification to ANY decision rendered by ANY court to start the ball rolling.

We, the people, actually DO have the power. We're just to ignorant to know that, and a Supreme Court decision 100+ years ago decided the court had no responsibility to inform jurors of their actual rights.

Weigh THAT against Miranda. Hypocrisy at its finest.

We, the people ar fools because we don't think for ourselves. The decision rendered in Texas V White is bullshit, and is a perfect example of th eUS government covering its own ass after the fact.

 

[Ravi]

jeesh...my thread got closed for being "stupid" and this one is okay? I full expect RGS to protest.

 

[Gunny]

jeesh...my thread got closed for being "stupid" and this one is okay? I full expect RGS to protest.

Address the topic or STFU. Your choice. If you want to make stupid, partisan comments, the Flame Zone is available and waiting for you.

 

[alan1]

Not a bad idea... insane.

again, a bunch of sore losers whining.

we tolerated bush for eight years... no one said "we don't want to be americans anymore".

i am so losing patience with this silliness.

jillian, it's not about "sour grapes", it's more about people being unhappy with the direction the federal government is taking us. The federal administration under Mr Bush (as far as states rights) was abysmal. Now it is getting even worse.
And it didn't start under Mr Bush, it started long before that.

 

[Ravi]

jeesh...my thread got closed for being "stupid" and this one is okay? I full expect RGS to protest.

Address the topic or STFU. Your choice. If you want to make stupid, partisan comments, the Flame Zone is available and waiting for you.

How was that partisan?

I think they can secede if they are successful. I was curious earlier to know how many were in favor.

 

[Yurt]

Im not sure what your asking with the poll. Are you asking whether its an option? Whether its legal? Whether its right? what?

all of the above and anything else

 

[Avatar4321]

Does the Federal Government deciding whether its legal or not really going to stop people from doing it if they really want to?

People act as though the law is some concrete thing. It really isnt. The law is very fluid. What's illegal today can be legal tomorrow and vice versa. It's convenient for having an ordered society, but it's a human construct. it doesnt really exist except when force is used to back it up.