No problem.
Congress granted California the right to form two state when California was admitted to the Union. That provision had no expiration and is still enforce.
If you mean the illegal immigrant populations, a greater percentage reside in the shaded areas that would form the lesser state.
On the state legislative item, the Constitution of the State of California grants to voters the power of the legislature on initiatives. That provision could only be change by a constitutional amendment placed before the voters of California.
Any loss of tax revenues from Los Angeles County would be easily off set by savings to the budget. Neighboring Orange County, is a large conservative County that generates large tax revenues from tourism anchored on Disneyland and other popular tourist destination. The same is true of San Diego County further south.
The proposed boundaries are such that it would be impossible for liberals residing in the lesser state to garner the votes necessary to defeat the proposal. Many liberals in the greater state would join in support with conservatives for the initiative as it would reduce the taxes, gas and utility expenses. We saw this type of alignment in the recall election over the raising of vehicle registration fees. Many people, even liberals, vote their wallets & pocket book.
EXCELLENT IDEA.
Have rural California, form a new state.
Everything but the coastal strip between SFO on the north, and LA on the south.
Since the (existing) liberal Californians will of course whine and stomp their feet, they’ll not likely part with the name California for the new state — which isn’t an issue since California is a Mexican name anyway.
Call the new rural California spin-off “Pacific” or something.
Interesting to note: The voters of the new state of Pacific, will not be likely to support amnesty.
So you’ll have a (dark) blue strip along the central west of the state, into which will be piled ... 10 million illegals.
Let the liberals work out the logistics.
GREAT IDEA.
Where can I sign up?