I’d like you and every one else on this thread to consider one case -— Texas v. White, which was argued before the United States Supreme Court during the December 1868 term.
Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase read the Court’s decision, on April 15, 1869.
Chase (then the Chief Justice), ruled in favor of Texas on the ground that the Confederate state government in Texas had no legal existence on the basis that the secession of Texas from the United States was illegal.
The critical finding underpinning the ruling that Texas could not secede from the United States was that, following its admission to the United States in 1845, Texas had become part of “an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible states.” In practical terms, this meant that Texas has never seceded from the United States.
However, the Court’s decision recognized some possibility of the divisibility “through revolution, or through consent of the States”
Now, I do not like revolution. We already went through something like this in the 1860’s and over 620,000 lives were lost.
But what does “consent of the states” mean?
My understanding is this — IT IS NOT UP TO OBAMA OR THE WHITE HOUSE TO GIVE CONSENT. EVERY SINGLE STATE IN THE UNION WILL HAVE TO VOTE TO ALLOW TEXAS TO SECEDE.
Good luck with that.
As the Lyrics of the Song by the Eagles said: “You can check out anytime you like but you can NEVER LEAVE.”
Nothing in the US Constitution says that the Union is like a street gang (”blood in, blood out”) or a roach motel. Besides, what nation in its right mind would bloodily suppress a secessionist movement in the age of instant news. If Texas really, truly wants out of the Union, DC would be hard-pressed to stop it.
I’ve read Texas v. White. I’m aware of the legalities surrounding secession. I wasn’t talking about that. Secession is likely impossible without bloodshed — even if it were legal. It took blood in 1776. It took blood in 1836. The attempt took blood in the 1860s. And ... we’ve come a long way since the weapons of the 1770s, 1830s or 1860s. A war for Texas independence is likely one we can’t win. We’re outgunned.
Like I said, I’m not for secession ... but I’m sensitive to the accusation that those that are are necessarily less “patriotic” than those who oppose it. They are wrong. But, they are wrong for the right reasons.
You are aware that the court has reversed itself on several occasions. I say go for it and let Obozo take it to the Suprmemes.
There are real questions surrounding the original admittance of the Republic of Texas to the United States in 1845. The annexation of Texas was by a simple majority vote in Congress instead of by Treaty. This was done because both the United States and the Republic of Texas could not come to a Treaty agreement, so it was accomplished by a vote in Congress and a vote by the citizens of the Republic. As Sam Houston said, “Texas will again lift its head and stand among the nations,” and Texas has continued to keep its independent spirit for 163 years.