So nowhere in the article is it mentioned that the supposed “Texas right to secede” is actually bullshit, and a complete misunderstanding of the actual right that they have, which is to be broken up into five separate states.
Except even that is bullshit, because it was talking about the Texas Territory, which was larger than modern day Texas.
The constitution clearly says that;
New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States 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.
So yes, Texas could request to be broken up, but congress still needs to okay it.
Now, as to the “right to secede”, that bullshit was settled with the Civil War, States do not have the right to secede, not even Texas.
Republicans like to pretend the Civil War never happened, and want a repeat, I guess.
That’s true, though to be fair most secessions are illegal and are settled by violence.
Counterpoint: The UK isn’t allowed to leave the EU. There’s no mechanism.
That’s not a counterpoint. The EU is not a country. The EU is an economic and financial understanding between many different countries in order to collaborate on things like currency, trade, tariffs etc. Even if the EU was a country which, I can’t stress this enough, it isn’t, the EU agreement has clear rules for leaving it. Unlike the US Constitution, which isn’t like the EU agreement in very many ways at all.
There’s a difference between having no official mechanism, and having the largest military in the world knock on your door to tell you that you can’t do something.
If Texas really truly tried to leave the United States, it would be war, and they would not win.
To clarify:
Even if an unambiguous majority of Texas would say “we’d like to turn Texas into an independent country”, you’d rather force them to stay by force of arms?
