What obvious election fraud? Just saying it doesn’t make it so.
The petitions are being made under the provision in the First Amendment to the US Constitution, that the people have the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. The White House has a standing rule that it responds officially to any petition which obtains a threshold of 25,000 signatures. One of these seccession petitions has reached that threshold, and as a result, the White House has officially replied that it will refer the matter to appropriate people for consideration, and will reply later.
Texas v. White did NOT preclude states being allowed to leave the union. Rather, it specifically held that a state, nor its government, nor its people could voluntarily dissolve the bonds of union between that state and the United States. Whether Congress, or the states in convention, could accomplish the task of releasing a state from its bonds is not addressed directly. However, one aspect of the argument that CJ Chase made would certainly seem to make it an iffy proposition. That was the assertion that the individual citizens of Texas were entitled to the continuance of the union, even if a majority of their fellow citizens felt otherwise.
Avulsion is treated differently from accretion. Reference the border of Kentucky with Missouri along the Mississippi River, especially at the very bottom of the state.
Most of the red states can’t afford to secede, because they receive more in federal spending than they pay in taxes.
All true. But if , say, half the population of a state wanted to secede, they’d have to be taken seriously.
1 in a 1000 is a joke.
What exactly do you mean by “taken seriously”? There would be no more reason to allow an official vote on secession than to allow a vote on reinstituting slavery or declaring war on Canada.
What if they try to make us eat poutine?
Don’t forget the South’s African-American heritage. Another thread explained that swath of Blue cutting through the heart of the Old South. It’s the Black Belt, where descendants of slaves are the majority.
Down along the Texas Border, Blue counties show where previous border “adjustments” with Mexico have affected the demographics. Our cities also tend Democratic.
Sorry, Yankees! Secession ain’t gonna happen.
Oh, and what did the OP mean by “obvious election fraud”?
Then we mightblame Canada.
I’m guessing it’s the kind of fraud you can only see if you already agree that there is obvious election fraud going on. It’s a bit recursive, but watching Alex Jones will either clear it right up for you (JOOZ!) or drive you into an angry gibbering rage.
A recent successful “We the People” petition request resulted in the release of the White House’s beer recipe.
A petition to legalize marijuana did not fare as well.
I suspect petitions in support of secession will get a response more similar to the one on marijuana than the one on beer.
I somewhat turn the question on its head…
If 100% of the citizens of the independent Republic of South Conservia at this time vote to join the United States, and Congress agrees, then we welcome them in.
One hundred years later the citizens of the state of South Conservia say they have had enough. One hundred percent of them want to secede from the United States.
Congress should then prevent them from seceding? Go to war to keep it from happening? Why should the political will of their ancestors in making the union carry more weight than the political will of the population at the time that secession is proposed? It shouldn’t.
And if only 80% of the ancestors wanted to join the union to begin with? Those holding the minority view got taken along whether they were opposed or indifferent. After all, the United States was formed despite loyalist sentiment being shared by some 15-20% of the white population.
For a new state to be admitted Congress could decide on what measure of support would be needed and require a free and fair referendum on the matter. IMHO it should be no different in reversing the process and seceding.
Yes.
This is all your personal opinion. As a matter of history and law, the question was definitively settled more than 140 years ago. Once a member of the Union, a state does not have a legal right to secede unilaterally (or as a member of a group of other states). The only way it could do so would be by agreement by the rest of the states through a constitutional amendment, other legal method, or Supreme Court decision. Frankly, it would be disastrous for this country if states were able to secede any time they were dissatisfied with the results of an election.
It would be a legal and infrastructural nightmare for that state and the states surrounding it as well.
I believe thisis the legal principle involved.
Well… I clearly label my opinion.
Fact:
Persons who did not want to split from the crown were dragged along when the United States was formed. Historians estimate that was about 15-20% of the white population which was still less than the estimated 30-40% who favored the Patriot cause.
Opinion: My opinion is this set a precedent that 100% agreement of the population is not required.
Fact:
A Supreme Court case addressed the issue of secession 140ish years ago. The court has, from time to time, quite rightly reversed itself on certain issues.
Opinion: The Court should reverse itself on this issue. Forcing a state to remain in the union against the will of its population cuts against the very notion of self determination that the United States was founded upon. By all means set a high bar. Require a super-majority to pass a referendum of secession. But respect the will of the people and go about things peacefully.
To date, the Texas petition has about 90,000 signatures. Assuming all of them are genuine, that represents about 0.005 (0.5%) of the voting age population of 18,300,000 (and 0.7% of the 13,600,000 registered voters) in the state. There is no evidence of a serious or significant secession movement in Texas or any other state. This is basically lunatic fringe, not “the will of the people.”
You could probably get that many votes to elect Mickey Mouse Ambassador to Mars (which would have equivalent legal standing). Let us know when the percentage tops random noise.
That’s just crazy talk. Bugs Bunny has experience dealing with Martians and is the only logical choice.
He would be better suited to Secretary of Defense.
Well, the SCOTUS decision did recognize some possibility of the divisibility "through revolution, or through consent of the States”. Note that we don’t know exactly what is meant by “consent of the States”. It could be that Congress could allow a State to secede.
If a Sates does a plebiscite which returns result that a majority of it’s citizens want to secede, Congress should take it seriously enough to debate and consider it.