Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

The Blue & Gray Press | May 25, 2018

Scroll to top

Top

Disgruntled States Attempt to Break Borders with Union

Disgruntled States Attempt to Break Borders with Union

By RYAN QUINT

Some people don’t like the fact that President Obama was reelected. They really, really don’t like that fact. They’re so mad they could secede.

Almost immediately after the election, starting with Texas and Louisiana, and spreading to several states, petitions to the White House were submitted online for secession. White House protocol says that petitions have to garner 25,000 signatures for review, and the first two petitions to secede have gathered more than that. Texas, last I checked, has around 38,000 signatures, and Louisiana. has about 27,000, which means victory for those groups, right?

Except not at all. Secession in the U.S. is illegal. No discussion necessary; just flat-out unconstitutional.

This country had a Civil War, and it was extremely bloody. New reports out of Binghamton University in N.Y. say about 750,000 soldiers were killed during the war. It would go to figure that, after the shooting stopped, the government would hope to close any further avenues of secession. And they did.

They did so in the 1869 Supreme Court case Texas v. White, in which Texas claimed they no longer had to pay for federal bonds owned before the war because their secession had nullified any previous contracts. The federal government responded by saying secession is a big old bag of illegality, and tough luck. To shorten everything to a single line: since 1869, secession in the United States has been declared unconstitutional and illegal.

That doesn’t mean that the people can’t petition to the government to vent their frustration, it just means that the Obama Administration can take the petitions and throw them out the window without a second glance.

The Confederacy didn’t just fill out some petitions and say, “Hurray, we’re our own country!” They raised an army to back up their claims, and for four years, they didn’t do half-bad. But, conservatives raising their own army in 2012 would be a whole different story.

I’d like to apologize to those people who so badly do not want Obama as their president that they would rather break away from the U.S. altogether, but secession is illegal, folks.

 

Comments

  1. Seriously?

    Article is asinine. If the right raised a militia they’d have all the guns and resources, the left would have nothing. The military is dominated by the right as well. Saying something like “b-b-but its illegal” is stupid.

  2. Some would argue the president has violated the constitution with his actions, along with states rights. I think there will be another revolution within our lifetime, unfortunately.

  3. Ignorant Bliss

    I always get a kick out of reading the comments on articles of this nature. Let’s take a look at some actual facts. The military is not dominated by the right. While it is true the officer corps is largely composed of self-described conservative Republicans (over 60% in 2008), only 32% of enlisted personnel identify as Republicans, with the remaining being independents or Democrats (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/07/taking-aim-at-t/). I find the following quote: “Saying something like “b-b-but its illegal” is stupid” absolutely fascinating. It is unconstitutional. As our principal governing document and the foundation of our country, people should see the Supreme Court’s decision as the final word. The lack of respect for the Constitution and government (especially the office of the President) is a serious issue. People are upset with the results of the election, and that is fine. In fact, I’m glad people care enough to have an opinion. But since when does having an opinion give anyone the right to insult, berate, and attack those who disagree. The majority of the country voted for President Obama. Get over it. And if you can’t, you (NOT your state) can move out (but I bet you won’t).

  4. Melinda

    It is pretty clear who he author voted for. I agree completely with “Seriously?” and “Andrea”. Why is protesting embraced by so many on the left (Occupy movement) but when conservatives protest it is unheard of? If Texas succeeds, I’ll gladly support them and move there.

  5. 2010 alum

    I agree that this article is asinine, but not so much for the reasons set out by previous commenters (totally agree with Melinda’s comment about how right-leaning protests are denigrated but their left-leaning counterparts are, for the most part, taken as legitimate).

    Secession of individual states is not, as far as I’m aware, constitutionally legal for the reasons set out by the Bullet. However, it seems as though the Texas v. White case it cites recognizes the possiblity of the dissolution of states (secession) through “revoution or through the consent of states,” with the emphasis being on states plural. I suppose that secession could be a possibility through a constitutional amendment, although I’m sure it’s much more complicated than a simple 3/4 majority.

    Also, what is constitutional is mercurial and is subject to change. Plenty of people were upset about the ruling in Citizens United v. FEC, although the main argument that corporations are people is, in fact, older than the ruling against secession in Texas v. White. I heard a lot of complaining about Citizens United, mostly from the more liberal-minded–which I bring up since this article smacks of it.

    Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, this isn’t news. THIS IS NOT NEWS. I don’t know how much more I can emphasis that this petition campaign IS NOT NEWS. It isn’t fit to be reported on by major news outlets, college newspapers, or anyone for that matter because it’s not newsworthy. I understand that this is the Viewpoints section, so Mr. Quint’s obvious bias, although not entirely in good taste, is justifiable. His choice of title for his opinion piece, is not. These petitions were not filed on behalf of any state in the Union. They were filed by individuals. That is a very important distinction to make and is the difference between this topic being of great importance and none. If the legislative body of a state were to file a motion in Congress to secede, that would be newsworthy. If the attorney general of Virginia were to say in a press conference that the United States government was violating its social contract to the state and that the only course of redress were secession, that would be newsworthy. If Mr. Quint were to do his job as a reporter rather than regurgitate what the mainstream media is throwing about as “news,” he would have seen that these are petitions filed by individuals of no consequence (the average citizen) and many of the signers of these petitions do not even reside in the same state. As in people in, say, Idaho, were signing a petition filed by someone in Texas for Texas to secede.

    You know what’s news? A petition filed by “Sean M,” from San Fransisco, CA “to dissolve the current legal system and replace it with a single Hall of Justice, run by Judges; motorcycle-riding law officers who act as police, judge, jury, and executioner.” If you thought that “states petitioning for secession” is actually newsworthy, what do you make of this petition?