I was rereading a book on the American political climate and the political and economic context of the Civil War when this question came to me:

During the pre-Civil War years, a great deal of the argumentation against a state's right to secede rested in the position that the states had no such constitutional right because it was not specifically granted by it and as such, any attempt to assert such a right is unconstitutional.

Had the Civil War not happened and we were forced to contemplate the issue of a state's right to secede from the union today, what arguments could be made. I am fully aware that we are living under the influence of the Civil War and the Reconstruction and that these events have had an immeasurable amount of influence on the national psyche and governmental policy, but I believe that it is still a very valid question. The overwhelming tendency of the last 100 years has been to treat the Constitution as it was within the framework of common law, not above it. The current dominant view of the applicability and interpretation of the Constitution has been one that is heavily influenced by post-modernism. In this light and in the light of the judicial activism of the 20th century, can a strong case be made for the unconstitutionality of the secession of a state? I propose that we undertake a hypothetical argument over this right under the assumption that the Civil War did not happen, or rather not answer this question.

I think the only reason we think a state is not allowed to secede was because the Union won.

II propose that we undertake a hypothetical argument over this right under the assumption that the Civil War did not happen, or rather not answer this question.

Duh, read the whole post first, dumbass. *slaps self*

Perhaps this is a different issue, but many Native Hawaiians are arguing to regain Hawaiian Sovreignty, which, in one respect, seems like they would like to secede from the Union. The impression that I get is that they want all the benefits of bieng a part of the US, but they want to govern themselves. (This example may be more suitable in a discussion of Native American rights however.)

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
For once I agree with Sheep. We only think states aren't allowed to secede because the North won. I know for sure that a state like Texas could secede if it wanted to, since it entered the union as a formerly sovereign nation.

<3 Mary

For once I agree with Sheep. We only think states aren't allowed to secede because the North won. I know for sure that a state like Texas could secede if it wanted to, since it entered the union as a formerly sovereign nation.

<3 Mary


It's funny you should mention Texas because there have been several extremist militant groups who have been working towards the secession of Texas from the US but the FBI has been effective in controlling them and shutting them down.