View Poll Results: Would you support the decision of Texas to peacefully and democratically secede, if voted upon

Voters
134. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    69 51.49%
  • No

    61 45.52%
  • Bumbershoot

    4 2.99%
Page 10 of 131 FirstFirst ... 891011122060110 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 1310

Thread: Would you support the right of Texas to secede?

  1. #91
    Sage
    Chomsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Third Coast
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,586

    Re: Would you support the right of Texas to secede?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    sorry you are not correct

    in constitutional law...all powers in the constitution are federal..all other POWERS not delegated in the constitution are state, since there is no delegated powers to keep states in the union per the constitution, the power of leaving the union would be a state power [...]
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    William Rawle, A View of the Constitution of the United States 295--304, 305--7 1829 (2d ed.)........

    William Rawle was George Washington's DA for the state of PENN

    The Union is an association of the people of republics; its preservation is calculated to depend on the preservation of those republics. The people of each pledge themselves to preserve that form of government in all. Thus each becomes responsible to the rest, that no other form of government shall prevail in it, and all are bound to preserve it in every one. [...]
    Well,

    your material was an interesting read, but what about that pesky 'Texas v. White' ruling?

    "In deciding the merits of the bond issue, 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""

    Source: Wikipedia - 'Texas v, White'

  2. #92
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 10:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,333

    Re: Would you support the right of Texas to secede?

    Quote Originally Posted by longview View Post
    History says that is exactly what they did!
    correct, but in that time there was a clear division of people..north and south, it is not that way no longer...

    the military we currently have has been at war for a long time, and using it to kill americans is not likely to happen.

    if the states would tell the federal government its not going to do something and i mean something which they deem not constitutional, ..the federal government would be powerless.
    Last edited by Master PO; 04-29-15 at 11:14 AM.

  3. #93
    Global Moderator
    Bodhidarma approves bigly
    Andalublue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Granada, España
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    25,504

    Re: Would you support the right of Texas to secede?

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    I think you misunderestimate the people of Texas, my friend.

    If Scotland can do it, Texas can do it.
    Y'see there's a mismisconception right away. There's no evidence that Scotland could do it, since they've decided not to try.

    And how would you even calculate our "share" of the U.S. National debt?
    Fortunately that wouldn't be my problem, would it. Do you accept that Texas would have responsibility for any of it? BTW, Scottish leaders accepted that they would accept responsibility for their share of the UK national debt.
    "The crisis will end when fear changes sides" - Pablo Iglesias Turrión

    "Austerity is used as a cover to reconfigure society and increase inequality and injustice." - Jeremy Corbyn

  4. #94
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    12,890

    Re: Would you support the right of Texas to secede?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    correct, but in that time there was a clear division of people..north and south, it is not that way no longer...

    the military we currently have has been at war for a long time, and using it to kill americans is not likely to happen.

    if the states would tell the federal government its not going to do somethingand i mean something which they deem not constitutional], ..the federal government would be powerless.
    I would not say powerless, they have quite a bit of coercive power.
    I think the Federal Government cut off Highway funds to Louisiana for like 10 years over the drinking age.
    I liked your point about the constitution not saying a state cannot secede.
    People tend to forget that in our form of government everything that is not specifically illegal,
    is legal.

  5. #95
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 10:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,333

    Re: Would you support the right of Texas to secede?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chomsky View Post
    Well,

    your material was an interesting read, but what about that pesky 'Texas v. White' ruling?

    "In deciding the merits of the bond issue, 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""

    Source: Wikipedia - 'Texas v, White'

    that is a court decision..

    not what founders stated and what was taught to americans before the civil war...which is what i am dealing with....the federal government is currently engaged in powers it was never delegated in the constitution, like regulation of comerce inside of states, which the court granted to them in 1942.

    it is the court, which has caused a great corruption of our constitution




    the 10th amendment to the constitution is one of the clearest clauses there are:

    "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people"

    no power of secession is delegated to the United States by the constitution, and there is no prohibited power of secession to the states per the constitution, therefore it is a power of the states, and a right of the people to alter or abolish their government.

  6. #96
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 10:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,333

    Re: Would you support the right of Texas to secede?

    Quote Originally Posted by longview View Post
    I would not say powerless, they have quite a bit of coercive power.
    I think the Federal Government cut off Highway funds to Louisiana for like 10 years over the drinking age.
    I liked your point about the constitution not saying a state cannot secede.
    People tend to forget that in our form of government everything that is not specifically illegal,
    is legal.
    the states send money to Washington via commerce taxes....they have a lot of power over tax money

  7. #97
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    16,250

    Re: Would you support the right of Texas to secede?

    The Supreme Court emphatically ruled that states do not have the right to secede. See Texas v. White. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/74/700

    Now there are those that would say that they interpret the constitution differently. Well, that doesn't matter. The federal court system is the ultimate arbiters of what is and is not constitutional. If the supreme court ruled that you have a constitutional right to a Texan wiping your ass every day for the rest of your adult life, then that is a constitutional right you would have. Your opinion of what is and is not constitutional is irrelevant unless you sit on the federal judiciary.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  8. #98
    Sage
    Chomsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Third Coast
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,586

    Re: Would you support the right of Texas to secede?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    that is a court decision..

    not what founders stated and what was taught to americans before the civil war...which is what i am dealing with....the federal government is currently engaged in powers it was never delegated in the constitution, like regulation of comerce inside of states, which the court granted to them in 1942.

    it is the court, which has caused a great corruption of our constitution




    the 10th amendment to the constitution is one of the clearest clauses there are:

    "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people"

    no power of secession is delegated to the United States by the constitution, and there is no prohibited power of secession to the states per the constitution, therefore it is a power of the states, and a right of the people to alter or abolish their government.
    Obviously you're sticking to your interpretation & understanding, and that's perfectly fine for discussion purposes - which is what this forum is about.

    But a cornerstone of American jurisprudence is that the law is whatever a given judge rules on any given day, with the final say given to the SC.

    Now, it's possible they could rule against themselves in the future ...

  9. #99
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 10:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,333

    Re: Would you support the right of Texas to secede?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chomsky View Post
    Obviously you're sticking to your interpretation & understanding, and that's perfectly fine for discussion purposes - which is what this forum is about.

    But a cornerstone of American jurisprudence is that the law is whatever a given judge rules on any given day, with the final say given to the SC.

    Now, it's possible they could rule against themselves in the future ...
    well i gave you what the founders said at the convention, and i gave you what was taught before the civil war.....so its hardly my interpretation & understanding.

    as far as commerce what i mentioned....the federal government had no power and did not regulate commerce inside of states until until 1942, because the USSC ruled that "because a farmer was growing wheat to feed to his cattle", the federal government had the power to regulate inside of a state.


    and the 10th amendment is very clear..there is no misunderstanding of it.

  10. #100
    Sage
    Gaius46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,760

    Re: Would you support the right of Texas to secede?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    sorry you are not correct

    in constitutional law...all powers in the constitution are federal..all other POWERS not delegated in the constitution are state, since there is no delegated powers to keep states in the union per the constitution, the power of leaving the union would be a state power.

    every state constitution in it states that the people have the right to alter of abolish the government they have.

    again there is no power per the constitution granted to the federal government to stop a state from leaving the union.

    article 4 section 3 deals with creating a state inside a state, as in the case of West Virginia

    May31st 1787..at the constitutional convention:A POWER WAS PROPOSED TO BE GRANTED TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT...that power is the power for the federal government to preserve the harmony of the union..........that power was DENIED!

    HERE IS THE TEXT OF THE CONVENTION.:

    The other clauses [FN10] giving powers necessary to preserve harmony among the States to negative all State laws contravening in the opinion of the Nat. Leg. the articles of union, down to the last clause, (the words "or any treaties subsisting under the authority of the Union," being added after the words "contravening &c. the articles of the Union," on motion of Dr. FRANKLIN) were agreed to witht. debate or dissent. The last clause of Resolution 6. [FN11] authorizing an exertion of the force of the whole agst. a delinquent State came next into consideration.

    Mr. MADISON, observed that the more he reflected on the use of force, the more he doubted the practicability, the justice and the efficacy of it when applied to people collectively and not individually. -A union of the States containing such an ingredient seemed to provide for its own destruction. The use of force agst. a State, would look more like a declaration of war, than an infliction of punishment, and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound. He hoped that such a system would be framed as might render this recourse [FN12] unnecessary, and moved that the clause be postponed. This motion was agreed to nem. con.

    The Committee then rose & the House

    Adjourned
    I know what Article IV Section 3 means. It counters the argument that Texas could legally divide itself in 2 or 5 or 10 and force the United States to kick it out of the Union. Note the "B" in the post I was responding to.

    SC Justices Joseph Story and Salmon Chase both argue that the Constitution amends the Articles of Confederation and the Articles call for a perpetual union. Additionally there's at least one SC precedent for interpreting the Constitution as calling for a perpetual union. Given it's importance I'd also argue if the drafters contemplated that states would be allowed to leave the union it would be explicitly mentioned in the Constitution and not left to chance as an unnamed power delegated to the states.
    Don't be a grammar nazi - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Book 1 #7

Page 10 of 131 FirstFirst ... 891011122060110 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •