I’ll bet there are lots of employers searching for people with a degree in the Hawaiian language! I hear the starting salary is astronomical!
i’ve looked around on wikipedia and found that there are similar secessionist group in Alaska, California, Vermont and Texas
Second Vermont Republic
Alaskan Independence Party
The movement for Californian independence
Republic of Texas
non of them seams to have much support though
The Consitution is silent, but the Supreme Court was not.
The Texas v. White decision declared it to be illegal.
I am not a Constitutional scholar, but if the court ruled secession to be unconstitutional, only a constitutional amendment could allow secession.
Alternately, Hawaii could sue the United States and hope that the ruling would be overturned. If it rules that secession is up to the state, I guess Hawaii can bid Aloha. But it may choose to leave the question to the legislature, then you would still need Congress to pass a law to allow it.
In any case, its hard to imagine any scenario which could allow a state to secede in the next fifty years. But you never know. If the Hawaiians make a big enough stink about it, we might just pay them to go away.
You can’t just go around citing cases willy nilly without actually ready them first, you know. You might miss something.
Firstly, the Constution is absolutely silent on the issue. SCOTUS, as it sometimes has to, was putting words in its mouth. This was almost immediately following the Civil War, and for the SC to declare that well, maybe secession was legal might have ripped the nation apart for good.
(bolding mine)
So, Texas v. White did indeed prohibit unilateral secession, it certainly leaves open - encourages, even - the idea that a State may leave the Union in the matter by which it entered - by the agreement of the several (other) states, and presumably using the “one representative per 1,200 citizens” system put in place by the Enabling Act of 1802.
A U.S. state is a state regardless of where it is. The United States is named that for a reason. Statehood confers lots of privileges but also responsibilities and it isn’t to be to be taken lightly. Both Hawaii and Alaska are full states in the American mindset and that is all there is to it. They actually have a special place in most American’s minds because they are exotic and far away from the lower 48 states. Contrast that with Puerto Rico which is in a roughly similar situation as an island territory as Hawaii once was and you can see the difference. Puerto Rico is not a state and never mentioned on the same level as the states although it is welcome to become a state at any time.
There is no practical legal way to renounce statehood once it is granted and there is no way Hawaii is ever going to be independent again. Texas has strong separatist movements as well and they will end up the same way.
I would take consent of the states to mean either Federal legislation or a constitutional amendment.
Perhaps fair, but that would be an assumption in the case of legislation at the Federal level, and a reach in the case of constitutional amendment. No amendment was required to admit the states, and thus none ought to be required to allow them to depart.
Consent of the states could be as simple as the Hawaiians passing a resolution in favor of withdrawing from the Union, and a majority of state legislatures ratifying the same.
I would think that is a bit of a reach.
Congress passed resolutions to allow states into the union with no provision for secession. At the very least, Congress would have to pass legislation to allow them to leave.
A constitutional amendment may yet be required, if the Supreme Court intervened (after a suit filed by a citizen of Hawaii who opposed secession) and ruled that the Federal Government cannot allow states to secede. I certainly cannot predict what a future court will read into the Constitution.
I can see Native Hawaiians being being giving some kind of reservation-like government like Native Americans, but Hawai’i is going to remain part of the US for as long as the US exists.
If enough people wanted it to happen, it would. However, it could not happen unilaterally unless the federal government decided that it was not worth the military effort to suppress the rebellion. The exact process does not matter, as long as enough people want it.
As an example, the Soviet Union, which was supposedly indissoluble, broke up because enough people wanted it to happen, and the leadership in the Kremlin, for lack of will or lack of adequate military resources, did not stop them leaving. That’ not about to happen to the US, but it’s one way an indissoluble federation can break up. And as another example, if the Confederacy had had more resources to persist in their rebellion in the 1860s, their secession would have succeeded regardless of what the folk in Washington said or thought.
There is absolutely no way the borders of independent Hawaii will be restored. I cannot believe for a second that if every person in the state voted for independence solely on whether they did or did not want to be American that it would get any more then 20%.
So much of the really good land in Hawaii is already in the hands of non-governmental entities. Unless they forcibly take land from the Bishop Estate or Campbell Estate there’s really no place to create anything like a viable country.
All it really seems like to me is that they’re trying to create an extra layer of government under which some people would willingly place themselves all the while they live just like almost everyone else in the state but paid for by everyone in the state. Maybe some Fed funds as well. That seems most likely only because there is no good solution because all the people involved are long dead. Some people feel like something has to be done but no one has a really good idea what it is.
Personally I’m strongly for the status quo. It seems like messing with the nature of equality in America. Full discloser, while my grandfather was Portuguese-Hawaiian my mother was adopted and we have no idea who her father was. While she looks local I look totally Southern.
I was born there, I want my new passport. It is a real pain in the ass to be born there, and then have to explain to dipshit ICE folks that my name’s not “McLovin”
Just for the record, neither Native Americans nor Native Hawaiians have been nor will be given reservations – that’s why they’re called “reservations” not “donations.”
Other than Andorra, it’s probably one of a very few cases in modern international law of suzerainty and vassalage between political entities.
This reminds me of a story by Leonard Wibberly, A Feast of Freedom, where the fictional South Pacific islands of Omo Lau and Omo Levi are detached from the British Commonwealth. One tribal chieftan decides “old ways are better,” and reverts to ancestral practices.
Their national anthem, sung to the tune of Jesus Loves Me, was, translated very approximately into English:
Lily-skinned feller across the sea,
I’ll eat you or you’ll eat me.
Then a US warship decides to make a ceremonial visit to the new country. The Vice President, Boysie Taylor, lands on the beach ready to pump a few hands and tries to get all friendly-like with the Chief. Unfortunately, not knowing the local customs, he violates one of the most sacred ones, and just like old times, they cook and eat him.
Well, you can imagine the international uproar that BBQing a US VP can cause!
Soon there are large aircraft carriers parked off the islands. The US, of course, wonders what the proper action to take is with a primitive island nation defended by fierce-looking outrigger canoes, their warrior occupants hawking cowrie-shell necklace souvenirs. The British show up to defend their former colony, and the French, Russians and Chinese appear because…well, everybody has to be someplace. Hilarity ensues.
How did he taste? “Like chicken.”
The James Campbell Estate no longer exists. :o
:dubious:
Okay, the terms of the origin trust ended and now is just a real estate company. 
What about this scenario?
Let’s assume, for the moment, that a state cannot secede from the union under any circumstances. However, there is ample precedent for a territory leaving the jurisdiction of the United States. It was done with the Philippines and the Canal Zone, and, if Puerto Rico wanted independence, it would probably get it as well. Furthermore, there is precedent for a state to split into two parts (with the consent of the states involved and Congress) – Maine was split off from Massachusetts and West Virginia from Virginia. While in both cases, the territory split off from the split was granted immediate statehood, I don’t see any reason why it must be so. IIRC, parts of Texas were sheared off after being admitted to the union and were only later became states again when they became parts of the surrounding states.
So, suppose Hawaii (with the consent of the other states in the Union) agrees to split off 99.9% of it’s territory to become a territory. The U.S. then allows that territory to declare independence. Furthermore, as part of the deal, the newly shrunk Hawaii allows themselves to not have equal representation in the Senate, thus solving the problem of Hawaii having a population of ten and two Senators. They’ll probably still have the one Representative in the House, however – I don’t think that can be undone short of a Constitutional amendment.
Net result: The State of Hawaii still exists on the books and has a small token territory somewhere on the islands. They still have a Representative in Congress. However, for almost all intents and purposes, the islands become independent and the state ceases to exist.
Zev Steinhardt
Actually, if the remainder of Hawaii is an uninhabitable area (say, the center of Mauna Loa), then there are no residents. If there are no residents, then you can’t have a Rep in Congress (A Representative has to be a resident of the state). That solves the problem of the Rep in Congress and the Electoral Vote that they would still have.
Zev Steinhardt
Could the current pretender to the Hawaiian throne sue in an international court regarding the “illegal annexation” of the Kingdom.
I guess the larger question is what is to prevent the US from doing the same thing nowadays? Have some citizens go to a small independent country (e.g. Taiwan), proclaim themselves the government of the Republic of Taiwan, be recognized by the US, admitted as a state, and have every legal point ignored by SCOTUS as a “political question” or Texas v. White. Do countries have an inherent and protected right to sovereignty or is it at the whim of the world’s superpowers?
You may be thinking of Kamehameha Schools, a private school that admits predominately (for practical purposes, virtually only) students of Hawaiian ancestry. Notable graduates include Duke Kahanamoku.
IIRC, every state is entitled to at least one representative.
That and I would change my address to:
1 Sulfur Fumes Rd
Mauna Loa Caldera, HI
If I lose my bid for Congress, I’ll go for Governor.