Why secession is bad

When it comes to sucking at the federal teat, the Magnolia State is the undisputed champ. And is it surprising that this should be paired with mockery of the disadvantaged and dispossessed? In other words, this amounts to little more than inverted Trumpism. The left ought to be resisting, rather than assisting, attempts to reduce citizenship to the language of contract. It should be choosing the hard work of argument and persuasion over the temptations of ideological bubbles. All of the examples you pointed to are superseded by the outcome of the Civil War and Texas vs.

If a state wants to secede today, it can only execute that right through war. Freedom is a fragile thing and being forced to stay in a contractual deal against your will only erodes liberty. The federal government is an agent of the states created for special purposes as outlined in the Constitution.

The states still created the federal government. The federal government is still an agent of the states. The states still ratified the Constitution and qualified their agreement to join the union by reserving the right to reclaim all powers delegated to the general government. The Declaration of Independence is still based on the right of people to self-govern, to have the right to self-determination.

The war or four judges did not change the very nature of liberty and the right to be free of despotism. So by this logic, the Constitution itself was re-written by a bloody war and four judges. The states undoubtely have the right to leave the Union. The federal government has NO right to initiate force, kill, and conquer a sovereign country state for asserting its right to self government and leaving a voluntary union.

There may be a peaceful secession when the federal government goes bankrupt. Guys, extremely good exchange that just emphasizes how difficult a topic it is… You both seem to be correct from your perspectives…. The right existed, but had to be secured. Folks who want to compare the Revolution with secession are missing a considerable difference — even most of the founders did not want to revolt.

They wanted their grievances resolved within the confines of their relationship with Great Britain. When it became clear that they were not going to have those grievances addressed, they felt they had little choice.

They had zero influence on the political process in Great Britain, and the King was engaging in what they viewed as unconstitutional actions in ignoring their petitions.

The situation in and the situation today are far different. As for the legality of secession, that was decided both by the war and by the Supreme Court.

The states gave up their ability to leave the union when they joined it, along with the other powers of sovereign states they gave up in Article I Section The Constitution is not a contract. It is not a compact between sovereign states. It is not a treaty. It is the governing document of an entire, indivisible nation. For the folks who think secession is a good idea, I guess they must either have refused or were lying every time they recited the pledge of allegiance.

Points well stated, and present a coherent argument. Bottom line, we all disagree with government actions at one time or another — live with it. Oh, one more thing. I do not see a delegated power granting the general government the authority to wage war on the states for leaving the Union.

In the absence of a power granted, the states retain all powers. By your logic, the absence of a specific sentence giving the states the right to do something means that the states cannot do anything since no where in the Constitution does it list the powers of the states.

There are far too many state powers to list because the nature of the Constitution is this: 13 sovereign political entities with all the powers enumerated and delegated a very finite amount of power to a special committee or Union to exercise those powers, mostly for dealing with external affairs, e.

So you are right that no where in the Constitution does it explicitly spell out that a state has the power to secede but neither does it list ANY other state power. So can states tax? Pass any laws not granted to them the Constitution? I think I will turn our conversation into a good, long, and researched essay nice way of saying blog post. Dan, I do not believe that sentence can be translated into a state having the power to leave the Union unilaterally.

There are plenty of Federal laws covering items not in the constitution. The 10th Amendment does not allow for secession.

Secession is not a power, it is — theoretically speaking — a right. Need to read your Hohfeld, Brian. See Wesley N. Of course secession is madness and is extra-constitutional, as John Randolph of Roanoke recognized. I would note, however, that the last point deserves an asterisk, in that the qualifications for exercise of the franchise and appearance on the ballot were anything like they were in the s, the percentages of persons voting for President Obama would be extremely low in many states.

These are people I looked up to while growing up, who taught me what it means to be an American. Their Influence drove me to join the military and serve, which I did for 4 years. I was almost all but dis-owned for voting for President Obama, but it was my choice, my reasons. Robert E. Am I Alone? Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

Lack of border protection thus allowing swarms of illegal immigrants to come and live off the good graces of the people. Damaging our culture, language and lowering our security as sovereign citizens of our respective States and of America. Creating new offices and appointing new officers with out the consent of the people to come and harass the Sovereign citizens and deprive them of liberty and other properties without due cause or process.

This has chiefly come from the creation of the Dept. A judicial system that has overstepped its boundaries and disregarded the demands of the people and both Houses of Congress. The Supreme Court passing laws that not only are unconstitutional but taking and ruling on case which have no Constitutional grounds what so ever. By allowing imminent domain and taking by force private property to be given to corporation and individuals with large financial resources.

The President engaging in an unconstitutional war and sending over 2, Sovereign citizens to their death. By allowing convicted murders and molesters to walk free from justice after serving only a few years in prison. Item Besides the fear that secession would bring violence and devastation to the entire nation, North Carolinians worried that the conflicts that plagued the United States in the s would become just as problematic in an independent Confederacy.

States in the Deep South feared that Border States would eventually abolish slavery and begin to pressure the Deep South to abolish the institution, much like the North-South conflict over slavery surrounding the election of North Carolinians therefore did not believe that secession would be the solution to problems facing the United States. If secession happened once, it could very well happen again.

All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State.

The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. History and law suggests that secession would only be possible with the consent of the country as a whole. The dissolution of the United States would require, at minimum, congressional approval, and the first difficulty that presents is "a matter of arithmetic," according to constitutional law scholar Michael Dorf.

The Constitution is predictably silent on the matter of the legislative process of secession, and there is no mechanism in place for determining how Congress could proceed on the matter.