Legal Question in Constitutional Law in Texas

Re: Secession

Some people won't give up the civil war. That, of course, was fought over the determination of the involved Southern states to secede. Didn't work then, wouldn't work now. The answer is no.

Re: Secession, Part 1

Howdy:

See this page for a full discussion of Texas' admission, secession, and re-admission:

http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ref/abouttx/annexation/index.html

The rumor I've always heard was that Texas had the right to split into five States. That's how I found this page.

To summarize, the Annexation Resolution of 1845 does say that Texas may split into a total of 5 States, but that it will be done through the process within the Constitution. So, Texas may not split by itself, but must gain the consent of Congress.

There are two theories on secession. The first is the Contract theory of the Constitution. Under this theory, once a State joins the Union, all other States have an interest in that State staying in the Union, and in order to secede, a State must gain the permission of all other States.

The second theory is the Agency theory. This is the one I subscribe to. Under this theory, each State remains independent, except for those duties delegated through the Constitution to the Federal government. The each State joined the Union for the convenience of that State, not for the convenience of any other State. I believe that if a State finds that it is no longer convenient to belong to the Union, then the natural right of secession still exists.

However, the War of Northern Aggression resulted in the abrogation of most of the agency provisions of the Constitution. Following the War, power in this country began to consolidate in Washington. Prior to the War, the real power was in the State capitals.

(... to be continued ...)

Re: Secession, Part 2

(... continued from Part 1 ...)

The 17th Amendment, allowing for the direct election of Senators, finally and fully transferred power to Washington, converting this country from a Republic to an Empire. Remember, that when the Constitution was written, the States were sovereign, except for the 20 or so jobs that were delegated to the Federal government.

Prior to the 17th Amendment, State legislatures appointed US Senators. If a legislature didn't like the job one of its Senators was doing, it could recall him. With the adoption of the 17th Amendment, States gave up that power of control over the Federal government. Now, both houses of Congress owe their allegiance to the people directly and, resultantly, to the Washington government rather than the States.

Getting back to the question of secession, with the consolidation of bureaucratic power in Washington, the Contract theory of the Constitution becomes more the accepted theory. It's part of the natural process in the transition from a republic to an empire.

In order to protect the empire 140 years ago, Lincoln, who was our first in a long line of imperial presidents, waged a vicious and bloody war against us.

If a State were to secede now, I have no doubt Washington's response would be no less bloody or vicious.

Whether a State has the right to secession really isn't the question anymore. The real question is whether a State wants to risk the retribution that Washington will mete out.

Hope this long and rambling note helps. I thought the prior answer was just a bit too glib.

rkr

Re: Secession

Mr. Restivo's histrionics notwithstanding, no state has the right to secede from the union and none ever had. There is a persistent rumor (which I have heard since I was a child 30 years ago) that Texas somehow enjoys a unique right to secede which other states do not have, but there is no truth to this tale.

The Constitution provides a mechanism by which new states can be admitted to the union, but no mechanism by which they can leave. Mr. Restivo's belief that states would have been free to depart but for the Civil War (or, as he calls it, "the War of Northern Aggression") conveniently ignores this rather crucial historical fact.

I am not aware of any nation on earth which recognizes the right of any portion of its territory to secede, nor can I think of any that allowed secession in the past. While I'm no historian and I don't claim to have an encyclopedic knowledge of such matters, I am rather certain that secession has never been a right recognized by any national government. If the United States had been an exception, then the Constitution would surely have said something about it. It did not originally and it does not now.

While Texans are justifiably proud of their state, the fact is that Texas became what it is today largely as a result of being part of the union. Statehood helped it build a thriving economy, brought it freeways and railroads, helped build its education system and protected it from foreign aggression. In turn, the rest of the nation has grown to rely on Texas's ports, agrigulture and industry, and has placed vital national resources like military bases in the state.

Texas enjoys the same rights of statehood as all other states, and none of them has the right to secede -- just as none can be removed by the rest of the union.