To take this in a different direction, legal or not (considering the “higher power” generally gets to define what is and isn’t legal and might do so for its own benefit rather than in the best interest of everyone, if there even is such a thing), how can it be determined if a subset of a power structure breaking away from that power structure is a good thing or bad thing? What arguments other than “we’ll use force” are there to support a region needing to remain under the thumb of a power they no longer wish to serve?
No but there’s no law against expelling a state from the union. Kind of a reverse secession if you can piss trump off enough for him to actually do it (no law saying that only Congress can expel them, so it would go to the courts).
If you want to gain independence, you have to fight the federal government’s monopoly on violence. At its core, that’s how all law is backed up. Two things you need to be a country. First, the ability to backup your independence with force. Second, the acknowledgement of the international community and their willingness to sign treaties with you. Sealand doesn’t have any issues defending their “independence”, but no one has signed a treaty with them for instance.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
The preamble to the Constitution is NOT the same as the preamble to the declaration of Independence. They were completely separate documents written more than a decade apart.
in fact:
The Declaration was rarely mentioned during the debates about the United States Constitution, and its language was not incorporated into that document.[44]: 92 George Mason’s draft of the Virginia Declaration of Rights was more influential, and its language was echoed in state constitutions and state bills of rights more often than Jefferson’s words.[44]: 90 [21]: 165–167 “In none of these documents”, wrote Pauline Maier, “is there any evidence whatsoever that the Declaration of Independence lived in men’s minds as a classic statement of American political principles.”[21]: 167
Do states even have a legal way to secede?
To take this in a different direction, legal or not (considering the “higher power” generally gets to define what is and isn’t legal and might do so for its own benefit rather than in the best interest of everyone, if there even is such a thing), how can it be determined if a subset of a power structure breaking away from that power structure is a good thing or bad thing? What arguments other than “we’ll use force” are there to support a region needing to remain under the thumb of a power they no longer wish to serve?
See: American civil war
Didn’t have a way to legally secede from Britain
But this time there would be no ocean between the two sides.
No but there’s no law against expelling a state from the union. Kind of a reverse secession if you can piss trump off enough for him to actually do it (no law saying that only Congress can expel them, so it would go to the courts).
Define “legal”.
Enshined in law, so that state can unilateraly decide to secede and federal govt must accept it.
Nope. The south already tried that.
If you want to gain independence, you have to fight the federal government’s monopoly on violence. At its core, that’s how all law is backed up. Two things you need to be a country. First, the ability to backup your independence with force. Second, the acknowledgement of the international community and their willingness to sign treaties with you. Sealand doesn’t have any issues defending their “independence”, but no one has signed a treaty with them for instance.
No. A full breakdown here https://youtu.be/1dhvry6E0jA
The Constitution of the US of frickin A
That’s the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence. And for as much as it is a foundational document of the US, it’s also not a legal document.
deleted by creator
The preamble to the Constitution is NOT the same as the preamble to the declaration of Independence. They were completely separate documents written more than a decade apart.
in fact:
You have both corrected me well, I admit I was wrong. Sorry.