Post by pavel on Jan 10, 2016 4:17:45 GMT -6
This week, Arnold Loewy and Charles Moster debate whether Texas is free to secede from the United States. Moster is a former litigation attorney in the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush presidential administrations who currently has offices in Lubbock and Amarillo. Arnold is the George Killiam Professor of Law at Texas Tech University School of Law.
Arnold: Texas seceding is a lose-lose proposition
Our debate topic for today is whether states should have the power to secede from the union. In terms of actual power, it seems fairly clear that the Civil War settled that states do not have that power. Beyond that Machiavellian conclusion, there are several provisions of the Constitution that seem to imply that once a state, always a state; the most obvious of which is Article IV, section 3, which limits the ability of states to combine or cede part of their territory to another state without the consent of Congress.
Beyond that, one wonders how a state would go about seceding. Would Gov. Abbott write a letter to President Obama (Trump, Cruz or Clinton) saying: “Dear President, This is to inform you that the state of Texas has decided to secede from the union. Henceforth, we are not part of the United States”?
Or would Texas simply take over Fort Hood, attempt to expel the federal troops (similar to South Carolina’s taking over Fort Sumpter to start the Civil War), and prepare for an invasion from the federal government? It does seem to me that if Texas (or any other state) attempted secession it would be met with armed resistance. Given the need to concentrate on defeating ISIS, this does not seem like a very good idea.
But what if contrary to all expectations, the United States decided that letting Texas go were a good thing. We could imagine President Obama (or Clinton) upon receiving the hypothetical letter from Abbott saying: “Good. A big red state is gone. Now we can be sure to elect Democrats in perpetuity. Good riddance to you.”
Read more: lubbockonline.com/editorials/2016-01-09/its-debatable-secession-states-right-or-not?v=#.VpIvFVLnWBY
Arnold: Texas seceding is a lose-lose proposition
Our debate topic for today is whether states should have the power to secede from the union. In terms of actual power, it seems fairly clear that the Civil War settled that states do not have that power. Beyond that Machiavellian conclusion, there are several provisions of the Constitution that seem to imply that once a state, always a state; the most obvious of which is Article IV, section 3, which limits the ability of states to combine or cede part of their territory to another state without the consent of Congress.
Beyond that, one wonders how a state would go about seceding. Would Gov. Abbott write a letter to President Obama (Trump, Cruz or Clinton) saying: “Dear President, This is to inform you that the state of Texas has decided to secede from the union. Henceforth, we are not part of the United States”?
Or would Texas simply take over Fort Hood, attempt to expel the federal troops (similar to South Carolina’s taking over Fort Sumpter to start the Civil War), and prepare for an invasion from the federal government? It does seem to me that if Texas (or any other state) attempted secession it would be met with armed resistance. Given the need to concentrate on defeating ISIS, this does not seem like a very good idea.
But what if contrary to all expectations, the United States decided that letting Texas go were a good thing. We could imagine President Obama (or Clinton) upon receiving the hypothetical letter from Abbott saying: “Good. A big red state is gone. Now we can be sure to elect Democrats in perpetuity. Good riddance to you.”
Read more: lubbockonline.com/editorials/2016-01-09/its-debatable-secession-states-right-or-not?v=#.VpIvFVLnWBY
