Message boards :
Politics :
Calexit?
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
KWSN - MajorKong Send message Joined: 5 Jan 00 Posts: 2892 Credit: 1,499,890 RAC: 0 |
I see this this morning and got a laugh... http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/article178435876.html California secessionists think their path to independence is easier than Catalonia’s (underlining added by myself) ROFLMAO Horsepucky If people in California believe that, they must not have been paying attention in History class. We have been down this road before, and well... the results were not good. From the decision of the US Supreme Court in Texas v. White 74 US 700 (1869). This case is a bit odd, given that the US Supreme Court was the court of original jurisdiction, and did NOT take the case on appeal. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/74/700 The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to "be perpetual." And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained "to form a more perfect Union." It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not? Under the Articles of Confederation, the 'union' was perpetual. The Constitution did not change this. The 10th amendment is important, but does not apply to this. The Federal Government has the responsibility that the State Government's are 'acceptable' under the Constitution. There are three routes open for secession, and only three. 1. Natural right of revolution. We have tried this before. Our 'Civil War'. President Lincoln pursued this war for the purpose of 'holding the union together', not to 'free the slaves'. We have that in his own words. Or... 2. Consent of the States. This term is not very well defined. How many States must agree? Does the Federal Government have a voice in it? Personally, I would think that a good figure would be the same level of approval as that required to Ratify Amendments to the US Constitution (3/4ths). But, I can also see reasoning that might require the Consent to be unanimous (to prevent a State from being thrown out of the Union against its will, for instance). Or... 3. Probably the cleanest route for a State to leave the Union would be another Constitutional Amendment defining an exact process to be used... Unless, of course, the US Supreme Court wishes to be a jerk about it... There ARE some provisions of the US Constitution that are not amendable (case in point -- equal representation in the US Senate). Since the parts that need 'Amending' are not even *in* the Constitution, but instead in the Articles of Confederation, the US Supreme Court might decide that it is not amendable either. For myself, I am a strong supporter of the democratic right of self-determination of a people. Also, I think that today's "nations" are way too big. Of course I am in favor of independence for California, Catalonia, Texas, the U.K., Scotland, etc., etc., etc. That said, it is becoming increasingly difficult as time goes on for this independence to happen without the Right of Revolution being successfully invoked. That is my opinion. What are you all's opinions? https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE #Texit Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016. Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30608 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Major they might be right, but it is a two step process. 1) Drop state, become territory. 2) Territory becomes independent. As you know through history territories have come and gone so this process has precedent. The question mark is can a state drop statehood? In the civil war the states took a different route, declare independence, and that path is closed. The more interesting issue with Calexit is likely the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. California might revert to Mexico. Might that apply to Texit? ;-) |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.