Texas DOES have a right to secede according to those who know the law and Constitution

[Rigby5]

TEXAS v. WHITE ET AL.

www.law.cornell.edu

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 700 (1869), was a case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869

In accepting original jurisdiction, the court ruled that, legally speaking, Texas had remained a United States state ever since it first joined the Union. the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null

Any argument Texas had that they could secede, was already ruled on.

That is not valid.
The SCOTUS can't legally rule on the fate of separate countries, like TX or CA.
In fact, the American Revolution establishes forever, the fact everyone has the right to seceded if the government is corrupt enough.

 

[bodecea]

That is not valid.
The SCOTUS can't legally rule on the fate of separate countries, like TX or CA.
In fact, the American Revolution establishes forever, the fact everyone has the right to seceded if the government is corrupt enough.

Secede is the wrong word to use with the American Revolution. The Colonies were not an equal part of Great Britain.

 

[Rigby5]

The federal government doesn't rule over Texas. They have concurrent jurisdiction over that land with the state of Texas. Texas has no legal authority to take that from the United States without expressed consent. And if they do that, that is indeed an act of war over which the U.S. is within their right to respond in kind.

Incorrect.
The federal government has no intrinsic jurisdiction over territories like TX or CA, the VIrgin Island, Puerto Rico, or any area that was and likely should still be independent.
Manifest Destiny and imperialism are inherently illegal.
The whole point of the Declaration of Independence proves forever, that government is not the source of ANY legal authority, and legal authority instead comes entirely from the inherent rights of individuals.
If government abuses rights, then not only is secession legal, but individuals have the duty to utterly destroy the corrupt government responsible for those abuses.

 

[Rigby5]

Secede is the wrong word to use with the American Revolution. The Colonies were not an equal part of Great Britain.

If you feel the federal government is abusing you, then you are not an equal part of the United States either.
For example, it is clear the federal government has ZERO authority over drugs, health, firearms, sentence mandates, or most of what the federal government is now illegally doing.

The only real difference is that the American Colonies did not care what abuses the British government continued in England.
But clearly the British government was utterly corrupt and should have been completely destroyed then.
Just as the federal government in the US is utterly corrupt and should be completely destroyed now.
How many times are we going to ignore illegal wars, murders, assassinations by the utterly corrupt US government?
Who was prosecuted for lying about WMD in Iraq and the murder of half a million innocent Iraqis?
Ditto, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Egypt, etc.

I agree secession is the wrong word because the federal government is so horrendously corrupt that it has to be totally obliterated, not just isolated from.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

What about the sensible people who don't want to swear allegiance to the new confederacy and forsake their American citizenship? A new confederacy would damned sure have slaves.

Love It or Leave It

They can take off for the diversity and Free Stuff of the Pinko States confederation, just like the Tories left for Canada during the first War of Independence.

 

[Rigby5]

The idea that governments own anything, are the source of any authority, etc., is not just totally wrong, but incredibly abhorrent.
That is not at all the basis for any legal since we decided feudalism was wrong.
But don't get me wrong.
Secession by the south was an attempt to bring back feudalism, and had no basis in law because it did not try to uphold the rights of all of its citizens, the Blacks it wanted to keep enslaved.

 

[candycorn]

Trump wasn't colluding with Russia, but...

Sure he was....his campaign manager was sharing data with Russian intel during the campaign.

What would YOU call that?

 

[bodecea]

Sure he was....his campaign manager was sharing data with Russian intel during the campaign.

What would YOU call that?

Hush...you are talking to the same people who believe that Jan 6th was a touristy event and that NAZIs were leftists.

 

[danielpalos]

Ironically, the Texas War of Independence started when Mexico tried to put a stop to illegal immigration from the U.S.

Imagine if the Native Americans had some profit motive for new world visas.

 

[Faun]

Incorrect.
The federal government has no intrinsic jurisdiction over territories like TX or CA, the VIrgin Island, Puerto Rico, or any area that was and likely should still be independent.
Manifest Destiny and imperialism are inherently illegal.
The whole point of the Declaration of Independence proves forever, that government is not the source of ANY legal authority, and legal authority instead comes entirely from the inherent rights of individuals.
If government abuses rights, then not only is secession legal, but individuals have the duty to utterly destroy the corrupt government responsible for those abuses.

Sorry, you're just too insane to engage. You prove that with virtually every post.

 

[MinTrut]

Why would that be con-sidered irrelevant?

Be-cause it is.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The USSC at the time of Texas v White consisted of Lincoln appoitees and others who were not known to have any southern sympathies, the ruling was a forgone conclusion. That would be like suggesting a British court would rule in favor of American secession in 1778.

Quite true. More to my point, though, is that a state which dislikes the nation so much that they no longer want to be part of it is not likely to care if that nation's laws declare that they can't leave.

 

[Turtlesoup]

Nope...replace Tejas with Puerto Rico.

I am not sure that Puerto Rico in its entirety has a 2 digit IQ--look at OC.

 

[Colin norris]

I can go along with that. It would mean splitting the 100% republican texas, into pieces, one or more of which would vote democratic, depending on how they gerrymandered the pieces.

Settle down. It's nothing but a gossip.point.

 

[rightnow909]

TEXAS v. WHITE ET AL.

www.law.cornell.edu

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 700 (1869), was a case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869

In accepting original jurisdiction, the court ruled that, legally speaking, Texas had remained a United States state ever since it first joined the Union. the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null

Any argument Texas had that they could secede, was already ruled on.

where does it say in the Constitution states can't secede ?

 

[rightnow909]

Texas has no representation?

basically, none of us has representation when bidum is in the WH

unless you are a gay black woman who wants to murder her child...

 

[danielpalos]

where does it say in the Constitution states can't secede ?

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

 

[konradv]

no one has the right to rule over you against your will... make u live without representation

That’s an argument for DC statehood, not TX secession.

 

[Dana7360]

Yup.

It might be a good idea to then split California into two states.

Stay at 50, don't have to buy new flags 'n stuff.

Adios, pardners.

Don't have to split California.

Just let the people of Washington DC have what the rest of American citizens have.

Representation that can vote in our congress.

Make Washington DC a state and we are back to 50 states.

Or make Puerto Rico a state.

We are back to 50 states either way.