Isn’t Texas a democratic state? Like you’d have to have a vote to do something like that right?
Abbott is so full of shit. Texas isn’t succeeding from anything.
Aren’t you for the freedom of self-determination?
Texas is neither succeeding nor seceding
Here we go
deleted by creator
We’re heading for Greg vs. the-giant-oak-tree-on-top-of-Greg all over again.
Ideas like this are so stupid that one wonders if that’s someone’s goal. Britain leaving the EU was one of the stupidest ideas earlier. A lot of the people pushing it were being completely disingenuous - foreign influence operations. This is even worse.
Someone should tell these guys it’s not 1861 anymore. They might find themselves on the business end of a hellfire missile if they keep running their yaps with impunity or take actionable steps towards actually seceding. Also known in modern vernacular as “Fuck around and find out”.
That’s silly talk. I say we deny their citizens all American benefits instead. VA, SS, Medicare, all of it. Only if they seceed.
“The dildo of consequence rarely arrives lubed”
Why should we tell them again?
No, no… Let them leave. #Texit
GM: “Well, you can certainly try.”
“Roll for initiative.”
Do it. Go on.
These dumb fucks can’t go a single winter or summer without their power grids going down and then begging for free money and help but they somehow thing they can be their own country? Fuck it, let em try and then they will find out that the Mexican cartels don’t fuck around.
These jackanapes get to yammering about secession every few years but haven’t actually done anything about it for decades. It’s all performative.
There’s way too many people in here that either don’t know the difference between succession and secession, or don’t know how to spell, or just were too lazy to look at what they were typing or what was being autocorrected.
Hypothetical from a non American. Let’s say Texas DOES secede. What happens to the citizenship of the Americans in Texas? Do they lose it? Do they have to leave Texas in X days to keep it? Can it even be revoked? Should it?
If they kept it, would they need to still declare their taxes, as US citizens must pay tax on international income?
They would become a territory, like Puerto Rico. They would still have citizenship and the benefits of citizenship, such as they would still have taxes. But would not vote in presidential elections, and their representatives would get no vote.
It is the best of all worlds.
Taxation without representation you say?
You mean their politicians can just blame everything on the federal government and pretend they took their voting rights away? Sounds like a dream for them.
I’m not like a US civil war scholar or anything, but there’s at least a glimmer of precedence to be found there with what happened to average folk living in the Confederate States when those states seceded. Babies born in the Confederacy were considered US citizens because the US (the Union) never recognized the Confederacy as independent and legally considered it US territory still. As for adults, it was similar… The US treated them as if they had never lost US citizenship and either punished or pardoned people for treason and war related crimes after the war. So I guess the answer would depend on whether Texas wins or loses the inevitable war that the US would fight to keep Texas from seceding/declaring independence in the first place.
About inevitable war - I heard some mentions of Texas’ conditions of entering the union being different, since it, eh, became part of the US at a different point of history. And thus that in case of Texas specifically secession would still be their right.
Have you heard of such a thing?
Anyway would be awfully stupid to see a war over this.
It would make more sense for Texas to be like Christiania in Copenhagen for some time in case of such a weird event - no recognition, but also no war and no borders.
This is a common urban myth, but is untrue. There is no special part of the Texas state constitution that makes any mention of the ability to leave the USA. Nor is there anything in the USA constitution which would allow for this. It most likely comes from a clause in the document annexing Texas to the United States which allows for the state to break into multiple states. However this probably doesn’t bypass the normal process of granting statehood. So if for all practical reasons not a thing.
Idiots in Texas believe this. The well informed in Texas know this to be false AF.
I mean, some Texans might think so. Maybe even Texan politicians. However, Texas tried it already. It was one of the slave states that seceded and got its ass kicked in the civil war. Generally, that’s the legal precedent that people refer to when they argue whether or not a state has the right to secede. The answer is war/no. That doesn’t mean it would have to result in that in the future, but I think the only way they could get it to work without violence would be by starting some devolution movement and getting the US constitution amended to allow Texas in particular to secede and that would require a constitutional convention and the consent of the majority of the other states. Otherwise, they’d have to win a war against the US.
However, Texas tried it already. It was one of the slave states that seceded and got its ass kicked in the civil war.
I’m not that ignorant of history to need to be informed about this …
but I think the only way they could get it to work without violence would be by starting some devolution movement and getting the US constitution amended to allow Texas in particular to secede and that would require a constitutional convention and the consent of the majority of the other states
I personally just don’t like centralism and don’t see secession as bad in theory. That, of course, means that not only a state should be able to secede from the union, but also any part of the state from it, etc.
Anyway, this is all not important. Healthy societies do well with any model (I’d say for a healthy society with any law there’d be no war in such an event). Unhealthy ones do bad with any model (even if there’d be laws designed to prevent war). Models affect their development and long-term “health”, though.
To add to that- it’s nearly impossible to lose American citizenship against one’s will. If you were born a citizen or earned it later, you will likely remain a citizen until you die, unless you give it up.
Even Jefferson Davis died an American citizen.
It’s even hard to willfully give up your citizenship.
The other replies to you are wrong. Texas can’t secede. Unlike the EU, joining the United States is one-way. No matter what laws the Texas government passes, or claims to be true, from the perspective of the US gov’t they cannot leave the union (or revoke US citizenship from their residents).
If you’re looking for precedence, see the US civil war which settled the matter pretty decisively.
I don’t want Texas to secede, they would be a shitty ass neighbor.
A shitty ass neighbor is a hell of a lot better than a shitty ass sibling
I hope someone steals his wheelchair.
So you take the going lower option in “when they go low, you go high” lol … I had to upvote for the image of someone in the 21st century stealing a mobility device from a governor of Texas. Does Abbott deserve such treatment as a handicapped individual, debatable. But in his official capacity as Governor of Texas, absolutely!
Another afflicted with magabrain.
He is wrong. But also imagine what that looks like. You think people in the UK regret brexit? Hahaha I hope Texas can grow all their own food.
Or don’t have any natural disasters they aren’t prepared for.
That’s your concern? We have farmland coming out our ass. Food isn’t going to be the problem.
You’re going to be eating cotton and hay or fighting cows for their corn
Pay per view would make them some income maybe
While Texas has a hell of a lot of natural resources, trying to break away from the entire commerce cycle and keep growing food ends up getting a bit tricky.
I mean hell you guys can’t even produce your own electricity effectively enough to keep people from freezing to death. Even fixing that problem without local suppliers and engineers ends up being pretty damn expensive.
It’ll start well enough trying to turn resources from outside the state to local sources. A lot of local small and medium industry will probably be bolstered. But then what happens when the US stops allowing import of cattle. You’ve got plenty of food, food isn’t your problem anymore, but now all those giant farms don’t have anybody to sell their goods to anymore. They’re going to go from feeding 50 states to trying to feed one state that already has all they want of that product. You can’t just f*** with supply and demand like that your economy will s*** itself. You’ll be trying to sell oil and gas to Mexico. Your ports will just be packed with tankers trying to find somebody that’ll buy your oil, so you can trade for stuff you really need. You won’t even be able to fill the tankers fast enough to keep that section of the economy flowing like it is now.
When brexit did it they just got a taste of the pain because all of their trade routes and agreements More or less remained in place just today non-preferential price.
Credit due, you’ve got a better chance of making it work then just about any other state, but y’all go mad Max before you got it sorted.
Lol okay, have fun eating all that seed corn and cotton.
Truth is they could just import crops from other countries until they build a water desalination and piping network to provide water throughout the whole state… country? 🤔 And if they did that, then they feasibly could survive on their own
But that would require actual care for its citizens, planning and forethought.
Also a lot of electricity….which they’re not great at.
They could just put solar and wind across the state, but again, planning, forethought, caring
lol. Solar and wind power. Are we talking about the same state?
Texas could benefit a lot from green energy without the baggage of nuclear, honestly. But try telling that to its people
Texas has the most wind power of any state last time I checked.
What countries would want to work with them knowing it would likely hurt relations with the US? How can they even afford it?
Russia. North Korea, perhaps.
<.< Over which border/through which airspace?
Hmmm… 🤔
“states have a right of self-defense, under Article 4, Section 4 and Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution.”
https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/full-text
Article 4, Section 4:
“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.”
I don’t see a) anything there that defines “invasion” or b) grants the states the power to act if the United States chooses not to.
Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3:
"Section 10: Powers Denied to the States
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."
Again, “invaded”.
It’s pretty clear from section 10, since it’s also speaking of troops, ships of war, and engaging in war that it means MILITARY invasion, not an influx of citizen refugees.
Dictionaries at the time back up that reading:
Rich of them to quote the U.S. Constitution when they’re trying to leave - which would mean that they don’t recognize the U.S. Constitution for being a foreign entity.
It’s in the Constitution! Democrats can never be the government of any state, only Republicans can create a Republican form or government.
Checkmate liberals!
