# Leaving the US

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [June 26, 2016, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417 "2016-06-26T16:18:05Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Stinky\_Pete](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bc79bd/32.png) [@Stinky\_Pete](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stinky_Pete)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/1 "2016-06-26T16:18:05Z")

</div>

If California (my home state) decided to secede from from the United State would it be allowed? Or would it be 1861 all over again and federal troops move in to prevent it?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/2 "2016-06-26T16:24:41Z")

</div>

There’s no provision for states to leave the US, the way there is for countries to leave the EU. What would actually happen if one tried is a matter for speculation.

If this question is prompted by the Brexit, you may find some of the info in this thread useful:  
[So, Britain Secedes from the Union. Why will there be No War?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=796650)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/3 "2016-06-26T16:38:57Z")

</div>

2/3’s of each house of Congress and 3/4’s the States … and Califexit is a reality … whether California likes it or not.

But, yeah, the “State of Jefferson” people are getting a little wound up about this, this is something of a movement in Northern California and SW Oregon to establish a new State separate form California and Oregon. Just talk and a few flags flying … rational folks kicking around the idea.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/4 "2016-06-26T16:43:19Z")

</div>

The US Government is a lot, lot more powerful today in both a general and absolute sense compared with 1860/1861. There is no way that they would be permitted to, if its unilateral.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Stinky\_Pete](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bc79bd/32.png) [@Stinky\_Pete](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stinky_Pete)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/5 "2016-06-26T16:43:42Z")

</div>

Wait, What!?! Are you saying a state can get kicked out of the US? I never even suspected that.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Chefguy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chefguy/32/138_2.png) [@Chefguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chefguy)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/6 "2016-06-26T17:01:40Z")

</div>

> [@watchwolf49](#):
>
> 2/3’s of each house of Congress and 3/4’s the States … and Califexit is a reality … whether California likes it or not.
> 
> But, yeah, the “State of Jefferson” people are getting a little wound up about this, this is something of a movement in Northern California and SW Oregon to establish a new State separate form California and Oregon. Just talk and a few flags flying … rational folks kicking around the idea.

Yeah, they’re doing so well economically down in that area that they’ve been releasing prisoners and police response is nil. But hey, if somebody _really_ wants Medford and Klamath Falls, I sure won’t stand in the way.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/7 "2016-06-26T17:19:33Z")

</div>

Now now now … we’re talking about what is lawful here and not the wisdom of some of these ideas …

> [@Stinky\_Pete](#):
>
> Wait, What!?! Are you saying a state can get kicked out of the US? I never even suspected that.

AFAIK, there are no limits to what can be written into the US Constitution, the bar for passage is set so high that no fruitcakeness could possibly get passed. So, a State _can_ be kicked out if the Constitution explicitly says it is.

Today, they cannot leave …

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/8 "2016-06-26T17:24:00Z")

</div>

Federal troops would move to take whatever steps necessary to protect the constitutional rights of anyone in California who wished to preserve them. That would be the central guise, for any remedial action that might ensue. Central to this would be the Interstate Commerce clause, and any other legislation that guaranteed portability of contracts.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dofe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ba0ec/32.png) [@dofe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dofe)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/9 "2016-06-26T18:07:03Z")

</div>

> [@Stinky\_Pete](#):
>
> If California (my home state) decided to secede from from the United State would it be allowed? Or would it be 1861 all over again and federal troops move in to prevent it?

Legally speaking, California cannot unilaterally secede from the US. Cite: [US Supreme Court](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/10 "2016-06-26T18:13:22Z")

</div>

> [@Stinky\_Pete](#):
>
> If California (my home state) decided to secede from from the United State would it be allowed? Or would it be 1861 all over again and federal troops move in to prevent it?

1. Absolutely not. The SCOTUS decided that in the 1860s.

2. Yes, federal troops would quickly overrun whatever California forces could be mustered. California’s border and coastline are so long as to be nearly indefensible by a state armed force.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/11 "2016-06-26T18:19:10Z")

</div>

Would Oregon be allowed to keep what she could grab?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/12 "2016-06-26T19:37:31Z")

</div>

> [@Chefguy](#):
>
> Yeah, they’re doing so well economically down in that area that they’ve been releasing prisoners and police response is nil. But hey, if somebody _really_ wants Medford and Klamath Falls, I sure won’t stand in the way.

Someone else can have Medford, TYVM, but Ashland is very nice.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/13 "2016-06-26T19:41:18Z")

</div>

> [@dofe](#):
>
> Legally speaking, California cannot unilaterally secede from the US. Cite: [US Supreme Court](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White).

A bit of TL;DR, as I remember learning about it: This case came some time after the Civil War. What the Court decided was that the Union was perpetual and indivisible; and the secession of the southern states to form the Confederacy was never legally permissible in the first place and had never legally happened at all, and would not be recognized by the Court.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/14 "2016-06-26T19:51:49Z")

</div>

A state absolutely, positively can’t get kicked out of the US involuntarily, not even via an amendment to the US Constitution. The one thing in the Constitution that cannot be changed by an amendment is that no state can be denied its equal representation in the Senate without its consent and kicking a state out of the Union would mean denying it equal representation in the Senate.

And the precedent from the Civil War is also quite clear, that a state cannot leave the US without the nation’s consent.

However, if we had a situation where both the people of the state in question, and the remainder of the states, all agreed to it, we probably could have a state leaving. It probably wouldn’t take anything more than an act of Congress.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![turner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/22d042/32.png) [@turner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/turner)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/15 "2016-06-26T20:14:30Z")

</div>

So how does the Declaration of Independence fit into law? I thought is was the legal basis for our separation from Britain and was approved by Congress (though pre-Constitution). It says, “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Now you can argue that the DoI was addressed solely at GB, but this is a declarative statement–not addressed to only GB. You could argue that since its pre-constitution it doesn’t count, but then is the declaration invalid? The only argument I can see (and IANAL) is that this is not a law and it did not in fact legally establish our independence–what did that was the Treaty of Paris.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dofe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ba0ec/32.png) [@dofe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dofe)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/16 "2016-06-26T20:37:00Z")

</div>

> [@turner](#):
>
> So how does the Declaration of Independence fit into law? I thought is was the legal basis for our separation from Britain and was approved by Congress (though pre-Constitution). It says, “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

The Declaration of Independence should be viewed more as a public statement of intent to Great Britain (and Europe). It shouldn’t be viewed as a legal document, as it has as much legal force as the declarations of secession that were issued by the states that seceded from the Union (that is, not much force except were gained through military success).

> [@turner](#):
>
> Now you can argue that the DoI was addressed solely at GB, but this is a declarative statement–not addressed to only GB. You could argue that since its pre-constitution it doesn’t count, but then is the declaration invalid? The only argument I can see (and IANAL) is that this is not a law and it did not in fact legally establish our independence–what did that was the Treaty of Paris.

The declaration of independence is not law – the [US Supreme Court](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4471514776465320556) has explicitly explained that the it has no force of law and not a basis for legal arguments:

> [@](#):
>
> The first official action of this nation declared the foundation of government in these words: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” _While such declaration of principles may not have the force of organic law, or be made the basis of judicial decision as to the limits of right and duty, and while in all cases reference must be had to the organic law of the nation for such limits_, yet the latter is but the body and the letter of which the former is the thought and the spirit, and it is always safe to read the letter of the Constitution in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence.

(emphasis added).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/17 "2016-06-26T20:39:50Z")

</div>

> [@dofe](#):
>
> Legally speaking, California cannot unilaterally secede from the US. Cite: [US Supreme Court](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White).

Unilaterally no. They can if Congress approves it which answers the OP.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dofe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ba0ec/32.png) [@dofe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dofe)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/18 "2016-06-26T20:47:57Z")

</div>

> [@Saint\_Cad](#):
>
> Unilaterally no. They can if Congress approves it which answers the OP.

But the OP’s language, especially his second sentence referencing federal troops response, indicates that in his scenario California is seceding unilaterally:

> [@Stinky\_Pete](#):
>
> If California (my home state) decided to secede from from the United State would it be allowed? Or would it be 1861 all over again and federal troops move in to prevent it?

So the answer to the OP’s question is still “no.”

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/19 "2016-06-26T22:12:22Z")

</div>

My understanding of the civil war is this: The south seceded. Lincoln did **not** send troops. He sent a resupply ship to Fort Sumter, careful to warn the confederate governor that it was **only** a resupply ship. The south used this as a _casus belli_ and the war was on. While I cannot say that the feds wouldn’t send troops into California (I rather think they would), it is not automatic.

[hijack] I have long wondered what would have happened if the south had not attacked. Suppose an uneasy cold war had existed between the confederacy for a year? Five years? Two decades? Would some accommodation have been reached? Would there still be slavery in the Confederacy? What about the border states that didn’t secede? I rather expect that slavery would have been abolished, but with some compensation. And fugitive slaces would not have been returned.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![buddha\_david](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ee7513/32.png) [@buddha\_david](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buddha_david)\
**Post date:** [June 26, 2016, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417/20 "2016-06-26T23:10:08Z")

</div>

> [@Chronos](#):
>
> The one thing in the Constitution that cannot be changed by an amendment is that no state can be denied its equal representation in the Senate without its consent and kicking a state out of the Union would mean denying it equal representation in the Senate.

Which only means, of course, that it would require _two_ Constitutional amendments – one to repeal that particular section of Article V (might as well strike that outdated reference to slavery while we’re at it) and a 2nd to kick California to the curb.

[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-the-us/758417.md?page=2)
