Voters in California contemplate forming new state

[Mein Kampf]

http://news.yahoo.com/voters-califor...ZTrzgAiDnQtDMD

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Residents of California's largely rural, agrarian and politically conservative far northern counties long ago got used to feeling ignored in the state Capitol and out of sync with major urban areas.

And?

[poser765]

Is that even legally possible?

[Mein Kampf]

Is that even legally possible?

The states created the Federal Government, they have a right to leave the union at any point.

[satimy]

This was a thing in colorado too, I think it could be done within the state legally but I dont think they would ever have the votes. They could just secede, but lets be honest thats not gonna work.

[stumpy]

http://news.yahoo.com/voters-califor...ZTrzgAiDnQtDMD

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Residents of California's largely rural, agrarian and politically conservative far northern counties long ago got used to feeling ignored in the state Capitol and out of sync with major urban areas.

And?

You must be bored.

[Butler to Baby Sloths]

The states created the Federal Government, they have a right to leave the union at any point.

I'm not sure that they do, actually.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Petertopia didn't work in Family Guy, what makes you think these guys can?

[Bdatik]

http://news.yahoo.com/voters-califor...ZTrzgAiDnQtDMD

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Residents of California's largely rural, agrarian and politically conservative far northern counties long ago got used to feeling ignored in the state Capitol and out of sync with major urban areas.

And?

This happens every year in California. Not a few months ago someone drew up plans to separate the state into 6 different states. Nothing will come of it.

[Tnfstc]

I agree, I lived up there for a bit and even if I don't agree with their opinions I do agree that their opinions should be heard and with the current population spread they feel the repercussions of decisions that don't apply to them or negatively affect them. Despite the liberal south and conservative north the ecosystems and environment is different enough to call for this, other states have issues similar but not on such extreme scales. Northern CA is agricultural and rural,while southern is far more arid but urban.

I'm all for it, as long as they change the name they want their state to be.

[Stormdash]

It's legally possible, but it's not like they can just abscond with part of California without California agreeing to it. And let's say the rest agreed and some deal was made about their portion of the state's sovereign debt and a million other things... then they'd have to apply for statehood. If it were treated as a territory applying for statehood once legally severed from California, it would have to

a) hold a referendum where a majority desire statehood
b) adopt a state constitution that complies with the US constitution
c) apply to Congress for statehood
d) get a majority vote in both houses of Congress in favor of recognizing them as a state
e) and have that resolution signed by the President

In practical terms, this kind of idea of calving off part of existing state sovereignties to form new states is almost impossible before getting to any of those steps, precisely because how do you wind up the business with the "host" state in a way that is amenable? What about federal property in the territory, federal agencies, and so on? It's a nightmare to contemplate.

But pretend that all works... are you going to get both of houses of Congress to support it? The Senate would be voting for each Senator therein to become less powerful by 1/51st, since the new state would have two Senators. The "host" state's House membership would be tacitly giving up seats that should have been theirs just to welcome the new state's population back into the House.

If there is ever a new state again, it would almost certainly have to come from some later-acquired territory of the US making the application. Puerto Rico is possible, even though they really don't want to, there are interests that routinely try to basically force statehood on the place (playing games with the required referendum on statehood). If the California conservatives (whom I sympathize with being relatively powerless in that zoo) or Colorado conservatives that had a similar idea would be better off trying to buy some giant and distinct parcel not currently part of the US and applying for statehood with that, if they even wanted statehood at that point.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not sure that they do, actually.

The correct, hard constitutional law answer is "flehhhh...?"

Seriously, there's nothing in the Constitution itself or any of its amendments that says a state can't leave (or by extension some portion thereof). There is a Supreme Court case that tangentially, as dicta really, says no they can't, but that's no definite guideline. And of course the one time it was actually done the seceding states were reconquered by force. Secession has been a recurring topic throughout the entire history of the US, most of New England wanted to flee back to Great Britain in the first couple decades. Personally, I feel that a fair and honest reading of the Constitution and the rationale behind drafting it would require that, yes, a state can leave the union, it's not like joining a damn gang. In practice, though, we already know that it would be opposed by force.

[starlord]

Is that even legally possible?

its in the state constitution iirc. texas has a similar provision as well.

[Elegiac]

The states created the Federal Government, they have a right to leave the union at any point.

They actually do not.

Texas v. White. States do not have the option to unilaterally leave the Union.

[Sunseeker]

The states created the Federal Government, they have a right to leave the union at any point.

Not in California's case. This is only true for the original founding members of the USA.

Is that even legally possible?

It is not. Only the Fed has the ability to choose to recognize territories, or parts of territories as States.

[-aiko-]

Have fun contemplating! Unfortunately it's impossible.

[Sunseeker]

Petertopia didn't work in Family Guy, what makes you think these guys can?

Technically Petertopia was never part of the USA, and therefore sovereign territory.

[Butler to Baby Sloths]

Technically Petertopia was never part of the USA, and therefore sovereign territory.

Yeah, Petertopia was a sovereign country under its own flag.

[mvaliz]

The states created the Federal Government, they have a right to leave the union at any point.

You said "forming a new state"... what does that have to do with "leaving the union"?

[Stormdash]

You said "forming a new state"... what does that have to do with "leaving the union"?

Well, forming a new state would necessarily be a two step process, one of severing from the 'host' state and by definition from US statehood, and then applying for statehood.

The broadest possible interpretation of Texas v. White would only be read as a prohibition against a state seceding unilaterally. It pretty much is logically impossible for there to be no way to ever dissolve a relationship with the union, when the union is in and of itself a voluntary one. As noted, it's not a street gang. That decision also doesn't really deal with the hypo of a state voluntarily partitioning itself. In fact, it really couldn't stand for that even in an expansive reading, or else West Virginia would have to slink back to Virginia.

[Notchris]

Well, it's a shade better then that Cascadia nonsense.

[Sunseeker]

The broadest possible interpretation of Texas v. White would only be read as a prohibition against a state seceding unilaterally. It pretty much is logically impossible for there to be no way to ever dissolve a relationship with the union, when the union is in and of itself a voluntary one.

That is incorrect, because with a couple exceptions, States are not "members of a union" in the sense of the EU. They are partitions of the whole for ease of governance. Texas joined the union by treaty, and the original 13 formed the union. Only those states have the legal ability to dissolve their relationship with the Union. The rest of the states only exist because the Fed granted them sub-governance status, which, should they attempt to say "we're taking our toys and leaving", the Fed can simply rescind.

I suppose a state could be kicked out of the union, but that wouldn't make much sense.