Then I’m pretty sure it would be legal. But I still don’t think it would be right to force the residents of Pt. Roberts to forsake their US rights by giving them to Canada if they don’t want to. Again, what benefit is there of forcing the residents of Pt. Roberts to choose between resident alien status, moving or becoming Canadians in order to give Canada a piece of land it has made no mention of caring about.
Agreed, there are no benefits and no reason to do it. I’m not advocating what the OP wants. I just wanted to establish that if there was a valid reason to do it, that it would be legal to do so.
Zev Steinhardt
Ah. Yes, all you would need would be Congressinal approval and Washington state approval. Probably Canada’s approval, too. Although it would be funny if we didn’t. Imagine their surprise when we foist Alabama, Mississippi, Buffalo and Detroit on them.
Although, maybe they would welcome Detroit - then they could finally have the Stanley Cup in their country (gratuitous shot at my northern neighbors).
THIS WHOLE DEBATE IS MOOT!
because the people in Point Roberts decided to join the US.
Originally, Pt. Roberts was supposed to be part of Canada, and BC, but several years later it was realized that the surveying geographers goofed. As a result, the people living in Point Roberts had a public vote as to which country they wanted to be part of. They picked the US, because at the time it had lower taxes (and there were no border guards to speak of).
So the people who currently live in Pt. Roberts have no one but themselves to blame. 
Nope – because next year the 'Canes will have another winning season, including stomping all over the Red Wings, and bring the Cup to Raleigh.
Hey, we’ve been saying it for over 100 years –
The South will ice again!!
If you live in Alaska, I would suggest that the entire contiguous United States qualifies as “a place in the US that the only way one can get to it by land is by first going through another country” 
Also, with regard to the Northwest Angle of Minnesota, my old road atlas does not indicate any roads into the enclave, or nearby for that matter, as well as identifying the entire piece of land as the Red Lake Indian Reservation. I wonder of the border is controlled at all here by Federal authorities of either country and/or if non residents can be barred form entering the reservation.
Do you have a source for that? The 49th parallel was surveyed and monumented from the Continental Divide to the Strait of Georgia (including Point Roberts) between 1858 and 1861, and I can find no mention of any permanent settlement on Point Roberts before 1894.
Also, there are roads to the Northwest Angle; you just need a fairly detailed road atlas to show them. Most of the grousing up at the Angle seems to concern fishing rights.
Wouldn’t the reasonable solution to the logistical problems facing Point Roberts residents be to lower restrictions on the border crossings rather than giving it to BC? Swap part of their property taxes for schooling in BC, allow restaurant deliveries, allow residents higher $ limits on purchases in Canada before charging duties, etc.
In any event, I don’t imagine anyone is forced to live there. If they don’t like the problems, they can move across to the “mainland”. Just a guess, but I’d think a lot of the residents and customs guards would know each other (my 5 year old road atlas gives its population at 750), and the hassles of crossing the line wouldn’t be very high anyways.
I have not been able to find a cite online. Not being from BC, I get the impression that everyone who goes to school here learns about Point Roberts, and the Pt. Roberts vote, and that it’s in some school textbook. It was mentioned in a book I read about the history of BC, but damned if I can remember which book.
Would building a Tim Hortons in Pt. Roberts solve anything?
I mean, the residents could feel Canadian, and although it ain’t pizza, Timbits are nothing to sneeze at!
<Homer>
Mmmmm … Timbits
</Homer>
I find this a bit silly.
First, we hold something as unconstitutional an action that this nation did to free itself from tyranny. That would make us hypocrites since the US seceded from England.
Second, if, for example, California decided to secede, wouldnt that mean the constitution of the US is irrelevant to the new nation of california? Why would it worry about the articles of constitution of a nation it decides to be free of? If it did, wouldnt seceding be pointless?
In the OPs example, I dont call that seceding. Territory is being traded by the federal govt to another country. secession is a democratic decision made by the people. Territory can be bought and sold by the govt, I believe that falls under eminent domain. Citizens who do not want to be expatriated must be relocated by the govt.
Dammit!! ho’d my post get here??!
Please disregard! it was meant for the secession thread.
My sincere apologies for my forum ineptitude.
For those who claim that the constitution precludes the US from giving up territory, how does that square up with the decision by the US government to leave it up to the Kaiser to determine whether or not the US should cede the nearby (to Pt Roberts) San Juan Islands to Canada later on in the 19th century?
Nothing to add to the constitutional debate, but when I lived in Vancouver, Point Roberts was thought of as the place you go to watch the fireworks on the Fourth of July. That way, you got to watch two sets of fireworks in one week – on Canada Day, and then American Independence Day.
In other words, when it was appreciated at all, it was because it was American. 364 days of the year, it was forgotten.
To expand more on what Rhum Runner said - it isn’t that the US isn’t able to cede territory per se, but that it isn’t allowed to cede territory belonging to states. Since Pt. Roberts is a part of Washington, the US could not cede it without Washington’s permission.
However, that’s just the legal argument. Philosophically, I think the US should have to get Pt. Robert’s permission as well.
Upon reading the Secession thread (which inadvertantly dropped me here to cause my big boo-boo post) I read that the US can allow a territory to secede. In which case, if the town is willing, the US can “sell” Pt Roberts to Canada, have the willing population apply for citizenship there, and the govt can relocate the remainder who do not want to be canadian citizens or have Canada give them special residence visas. All parties concerned must be in full agreement. The US congress can pass a special bill to allow the sale.
Now that they’ve been covid-confined for months, some locals are getting serious about signing on with Canada – proposing that the land become part of Canada and all residents becoming dualies. Here’s a sweet video on how some of them feel. This US City Could Be Sold To Canada - YouTube
Let me introduce you to Alaska, aka West Yukon.
There’s a tiny island off the east coast, St Pierre, which remains part of France!
(And it’s very French by all accounts!)
And if one of the constituents needs surgery French Healthcare pays to send them to France for it.
Everyone seems happy with the arrangement, so it can all work just fine apparently!