It is legal to secede — and all of these professors of law, and scholars of history say so.

Image for post
Image for post

•Texas versus White, is a American Supreme Court case that said that you can secede “through consent of the states”

•The constitution is silent on secession — it says nothing.

•The American constitution says the American Supreme Court decides all legal issues — and they said that you can secede. America’s government has to approve, and you can’t secede on your own –but there is a legal path.

•Making the conclusion “making any move illegal” — not true.

•These professors and scholars have pointed out that Texas V White exists, and that it says “consent of the states” is mentioned as a — POSSIBLE — path for secession.

“Consent” has never been defined, and could mean that a SIMPLE MAJORITY (51%) OF CONGRESS WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE — FOR CALIFONRIA TO SECEDE.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra July 10 2017

“In 1869, following the Civil War, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Texas v. White that the initial act admitting a state to the Union “was final.” “There was no place for reconsideration, or revocation,” the court said, “except through revolution, or through consent of the states.””

http://www.lao.ca.gov/BallotAnalysis/Initiative/2017-005

California Attorney General Kathleen Kenealy January 10 2017

“In 1869, following the Civil War, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Texas v. White that the initial act admitting a state to the Union “was final.” “There was no place for reconsideration, or revocation,” the court said, “except through revolution, or through consent of the states.””

California Attorney General Kamala Harris August 28,2015

In 1869, following the Civil War, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Texas v. White that the initial act admitting a state into the Union “was final.” “There was no place for reconsideration, or revocation,” the court said, “except through revolution, or through consent ofthe states.”

https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/fiscal-impact-estimate-report(15-0037)_0.pdf

Jason Sorens — Professor at Dartmouth college, School of government

http://home.dartmouth.edu/faculty-directory/jason-p-sorens

Could Texas Actually Secede From the United States? By Ashley Portero 11/13/12

http://www.ibtimes.com/could-texas-actually-secede-united-states-876060

“Basically, secession isn’t banned by the Constitution, and the controlling precedent remains Texas v. White, which says that unilateral secession is illegal, and that secession would require the consent of the UnitedStates as a whole,” Sorens said in an e-mail.”

“In 1869, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Texas v. White that states cannot unilaterally secede from the Union, not that it could not be done altogether. Indeed, there is no specific ban on state secession in the U.S. Constitution, even though that document does discuss states in Article IV”

“New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.”

Clearly missing from that paragraph is something to the effect of, “nor shall any State be expelled, or be permitted to withdraw from this Union.” What we have instead is the intent of the founders to allow Congress to handle the matters of statehood which explains why in Texas v. White the Supreme Court put the matter of state secession into their hands.”

“When Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.”

Michael C. Dorf — Professor at Cornel University of law

http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/faculty/bio_michael_dorf.cfm

No Litmus Test: Law versus Politics in the Twenty-First Century March 9, 2006 Page 82

“And indeed, the Supreme Court in Texas V White recognized that secession by mutual agreement stands on a different footing from unilateral secession. After finding against a state’s right of unilateral secession, the Court acknowledged an exception for secession “through revolution, or through consent of the states.”

https://www.amazon.com/gp/search?index=books&linkCode=qs&keywords=9780742550308

Lily Rothman — History editor Time Magazine

https://www.linkedin.com/in/rothmanlily/

Texas Secession Is Not a New Idea May 13, 2016

“When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation,” the decision stated. “The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration, or revocation, except through revolution, or through consent of the States.”

http://time.com/4329364/texas-secede-history/

William Murphy — Professor at Oswego New York University, History department

Can a U.S. state secede from the Union? Is there a clause in the Constitution which allows states to secede from the Union, or can this process be done by voting? April 7 2017

“What Madison was saying here was that, since the Union was formed as an agreement among the states, that agreement cannot be dissolved without the agreement of all the interested parties involved. So for one state to leave the Union, or one group of states, would require the permission and agreement of all the states.””

https://www.quora.com/Can-a-U-S-state-secede-from-the-Union-Is-there-a-clause-in-the-Constitution-which-allows-states-to-secede-from-the-Union-or-can-this-process-be-done-by-voting

https://www.oswego.edu/history/content/william-murphy

Clifford F. Thies — Professor at Shenandoah University

Secession Is in Our Future 04/28/2009

“The US law of secession is thought to have been decided by the US Supreme Court in White v. Texas, following the Civil War. The actual matter to be decided was relatively insignificant. The Court used the occasion to issue a very broad decision. Chief Justice Chase, speaking for the Court, said, The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.”

https://mises.org/library/secession-our-future

https://www.su.edu/faculty-staff/faculty/clifford-f-thies/

Sanford Levinson — Professor at Texas Law University

https://law.utexas.edu/faculty/sanford-v-levinson

In Politically Polarized U.S., State Secession Talk Gains Steam By Katherine Reynolds Lewis July 25, 2016

“Many lawyers would say secession is unconstitutional and many laypeople would say that the Civil War settled the question for good. Those in the dissenting camp point out that the U.S. Constitution doesn’t explicitly ban secession, the way that constitutions of countries like France or Spain do.

“If you asked lawyers, is there a legal right to secede, the answer you will get from almost all of them is no. I disagree,” Levinson says. “I don’t think there’s an open and shut legal answer.”

Sorens notes that the 1869 Supreme Court decision in Texas v. White held that a state couldn’t unilaterally leave the union, but it didn’t rule out a negotiated secession. “That decision said states would have to get the consent of the union, the other states,” he says. “It’s unclear how you’d do that.”

http://fortune.com/2016/07/25/us-state-secession-brexit-election/

Danny Cevallos — CNN/ MSNBC legal analyst

What history says about ‘Calexit’ November 11, 2016

“Thirty-eight out of 50 statehouses would have to approve it to satisfy what the Supreme Court calls the “consent of the states” requirement established in the 1869 Texas v. White decision.”

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/opinions/history-tells-us-about-calexit-cevallos/index.html

Scott Shafer — KQED senior editor for California politics

CalExit Measure Gets OK to Collect State Ballot Signatures Jan 27, 2017

“secession would require a federal constitutional amendment and require two-thirds of the states to approve it.”

http://ww2.kqed.org/news/2017/01/27/calexit-measure-gets-ok-to-collect-state-ballot-signatures/

http://ww2.kqed.org/news/author/scottshafer/

Stephen M. Duvernay — Lawyer and senior research fellow at California constitution center — UC Berkeley Constitution center

CalExit: Good Luck With That November 13 2016

“The secessionists concede that states cannot unilaterally secede from the Union. Instead, they focus on this bit in White as not ruling out that it could be done: “There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.””

http://scocablog.com/calexit-good-luck-with-that/

http://benbrooklawgroup.com/steve-duvernay/

James Rogers — Professor Texas A and M University, Political Science Department

California secession, Texas v. White California Secedin’ February 8 2017

That states may not unilaterally secede from the Union, however, does not mean there is no route by which a state might secede peacefully, and even legally. Indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court has said there is, albeit, saying it in dictum. In holding in Texas v. White (1869) that Texas did not truly secede from the Union, Chief Justice Chase, writing for the majority, nonetheless identified two routes by which U.S. states could peacefully secede: “There was no place for reconsideration or revocation [of Texas’s entry in the Union], except through revolution or through consent of the States.”

http://www.libertylawsite.org/2017/02/08/california-secedin/

https://pols.tamu.edu/about-us/faculty-directory/james-r-rogers-associate-professor/

Stephen J. Kaufman & George M. Yin — lawyers at Kaufman legal group, which specializes in politics and government

Calexit and the Constitution 3/7/2017

“However, the second part of the statement, “consent of the states,” suggests that secession might be accomplished by an amendment to the U.S. Constitution pursuant to Article V, whereby amendments may be proposed either by Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House and the Senate or by a convention of states called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures. To then become part of the Constitution, however, an amendment must be ratified by either — as determined by Congress — the legislatures of three quarters of the states or state ratifying conventions in three quarters of the states. In short, this is no easy task.”

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/kaufman-legal-group-named-top-boutique-today-by-daily-journal-300542134.html

http://www.kaufmanlegalgroup.com/files/news_20170307_ladj.pdf

Ruthann Robson — Professor City University of New York, School of law

Texas Secession Redux November 14, 2012

“There is however, the possibility of “revolution” — — — or, perhaps more intriguingly, “consent of the States.””

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/conlaw/2012/11/texas-secession-redux.html

Daniel Farber — Professor UC Berkelely, School of law

Wanna get away? Calexit secession plan possible, but faces huge hurdles by Taryn Luna December 01, 2016

“Daniel Farber, a law professor at UC Berkeley, pointed to a Supreme Court decision, Texas v. White, in 1869 that said Texas “entered into an indissoluble relation” when it became part of the United States. The case related to bonds sold by Texas during the Civil War. The Supreme Court ruling determined “the Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union composed of indestructible States.” Texas could only revoke its inclusion in the union “through revolution or through consent of the States,” the court rule.”

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article118162903.html

David A. Carrillo, executive director of the California Constitution Center at the UC Berkeley’s law school.

Admits that Texas v White is a legal decision on secession and that it does include the phrase you can legally secede “through consent of the states”

“Texas v. White held that states cannot secede, and that decision’s off-hand comment about the states consenting probably refers to the constitutional amendment procedure.”

https://www.pe.com/2018/08/31/a-nation-within-a-nation-latest-version-of-california-succession-plan-touches-native-americans/

Written by

President Yes California/ Calexit movement. Interviewed by Politico, New York Times, FOX, WashPost, LA Times, LA Weekly, Sac Bee, Daily Show w/TN, Mother Jones

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store