Which political ideology do you most identify with?
They would have problems with all sides, and they’re not in charge anymore, nor should the basis of…
@9CJ6CB64mos4MO
No it really isn’t, and they, despite popular myth, cannot secede. The civil war solidified that, and it’s not up to just Texas as a whole, that requires the Supreme Court and the consent of the states. It can’t happen, and shouldn’t.
@Patriot-#1776Constitution4mos4MO
The Tenth Amendment says that all powers not specifically given to the federal government are reserved for the states (we've gone through this at length, remember the General Welfare discussion?) and the states NEVER voluntarily surrendered these rights, therefore LEGALLY the states still possess the residuary mass of right to their self-government, have their own sovereignty and independence, and have a duty nullify unconstitutional laws and secede from the Union as they so choose. Show me when, in history, the states ever surrendered these rights, and I may reconsider, but I can guarantee you they never, ever, surrendered them voluntarily. But I do challenge you to find me an instance in which they did...
@9CJ6CB64mos4MO
The “right” to secede was interpreted to never truly be allowed in the first place in the Supreme Court case of 1869 Texas v. White. At least, they are not allowed to do so, even by state majority, on a unilateral basis if the other states and the federal government did not permit it. The only way it leaves is if the US government is okay with it, and no, that’s never happening. It would require a massive change of precedent, and a large majority of the Supreme Court AND congress to let them leave.
@Patriot-#1776Constitution4mos4MO
Look, in the Constitution for the following clause: "The judicial power of the United States shall be vested in a Supreme Court, which shall be the final arbiter and decider of all constitutional disputes within this Union, shall have no limits on its power but what it itself establishes, and shall be allowed to rewrite the constitution to the detriment of state sovereignty as it shall see fit." Don't see it? That's because it doesn't exist. The Supreme Court was never intended to decide such momentous measures, it was intended to settle law suits that could not be… Read more
@9CJ6CB64mos4MO
Sometimes the states don’t get a choice in this situation, secession is one of them. Even the articles of confederation didn’t expressly allow the full secession of a state at will, a legal loophole was used to reach that point, which was exploited to create the new Constitution in the first place as a result, and no matter what ancient cases have been made, the cases more recent and strong in precedent trump them, thereby making that right disagreed upon at best, and rejected unless stated directly in the constitution as a right. The Supreme Court is designed to interpret the con… Read more
