Texas Secession? Perry, One Third of Texans Are Wrong: Texas Can't Secede

April 17, 2009 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (660)

By Robert Schlesinger, Thomas Jefferson Street blog

As if their current governor and his predecessor have not done enough damage to Texans' reputation for Constitutional acuity, nearly 1 in 3 Texas voters think that their state has the legal right to secede from the Union, according to a new Rasmussen Poll.

Umm, no.

On the bright side (such as it is), only 1 in 5 Texas voters would actually like to break off from the Union. Fully three quarters of Texas voters are content to remain part of these United States. Gee, thanks.

This discussion was sparked by Texas Gov. Rick Perry's assertion that Texas has the unique right to secede from the U.S. of A. (Side question: Why the quiescence of the hyper-patriotic right? Why are they not demanding that Perry love this country or leave it—and reminding him he can't take his state with him?)

It is of course an old urban legend that since Texas entered the Union as a sovereign Republic, it has reserved the right to reclaim its old status. Horse-hockey.

Two points to consider. First, there's this brief history of the Lone Star State's 1845 entry into the Union, emphasis added:

When all attempts to arrive at a formal annexation treaty failed, the United States Congress passed—after much debate and only a simple majority—a Joint Resolution for Annexing Texas to the United States. Under these terms, Texas would keep both its public lands and its public debt, it would have the power to divide into four additional states "of convenient size" in the future if it so desired, and it would deliver all military, postal, and customs facilities and authority to the United States government. (Neither this joint resolution or the ordinance passed by the Republic of Texas ' Annexation Convention gave Texas the right to secede.)

That paragraph comes from what I can only assume to be an authoritative source on the matter: the Texas State Library and Archives Commission. (Tip of my cowboy hat to an old college pal—from Texas—who posted the link on Facebook.)

Second point: We fought a war over this. Lots of Americans died. The secessionists lost—including the ones in Texas. Secession is no more legal now than it was then.

And while talking about secession undoubtedly plays well among the 3 in 10 Texas voters ill-informed enough to think it's a serious political statement, it also makes the rest of the country (and likely the rest of the state) roll our eyes in bewilderment at the Lone Star Clown.

On Facebook? You can keep up with Thomas Jefferson Street blog postings through Facebook's Networked Blogs.

Tags:
Rick Perry,
Texas

Reader Comments Read all comments (660)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." 9th Amendment.

Is there any legal reason Texas couldn't secede? According to the Joint Resolution, "Texas" still exists as an entity and is not owned by the United States.

I don't think secession would be in Texas's best interest right now, but it seems pretty clear that if it did come to that Texas does have the right. I'm sure the U.S. would illegally invade though, which means we'd have to fight American soldiers who are just following corrupt orders. That sounds pretty horrible to me, so I hope it doesn't come to that any time soon.

Tyler Blake of TX 10:59PM January 15, 2013

"Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right – a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit."

Who said that? That's right Abraham Lincoln. Keep quoting the Civil War as the end all to the talk of succession. The fact of the matter is anything not specifically granted or denied in the US Constitution remains in the hands of the States. That being the case, the Constitutions lack of talk on Succession, in itself leaves the door open.

The US was founded as a Union of Republics, not one Democracy. Get it straight.

Definition of Liberal: A person so open minded, their brain had fallen out completely!

Benjamin Elliott of TX 1:06PM January 15, 2013

I'm no constitutional lawyer...and I'm pretty sure I can't be because I live in Texas and, in the opinion of Mr. Schlesinger, am barely able to feed myself.

Furthermore, since the constitution of the US doesn't specifically grant me the right to become a constitutional lawyer... clearly I cannot.

Oh! Look! A Squirrel!! God, we're stupid people down here. Thanks for your help explaining complicated stuff to us, Bob.

Mike of TX 5:19PM January 14, 2013

Robert Schlesinger

Robert Schlesinger

Robert Schlesinger is managing editor for opinion at U.S. News and World Report, overseeing all opinion editorial content. He is the author of "White House Ghosts: Presidents and Their Speechwriters." E-mail him at rschlesinger@usnews.com. Follow him on Twitter: @rschles.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

An End to the NRA’s Angry Swagger

Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans, and even of NRA members, favor universal background checks.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

Latest Videos

advertisement