texas gave up a lot of territory to be a part of the union, and even then one of the provisions was that it had to subdivide into 5 states, but the texans wouldn't have any of that so the union was forced to accept them whole (albeit, with a lot of its northern territory annexed into other states).
i doubt they would subdivide now. if they do so, there would no longer be a texas and they would turn into bickering states with a lot less political power than the whole.
Originally posted by no1marauderCouldn't it be argued that Congress approved any future subdivision of Texas in 1845, and that therefore the terms of Article 4, Clause 3 of the Constitution has already been fulfilled?
I highly doubt the SCOTUS would accept the idea of "advance consent" as overriding the explicit language of the Constitution that any subdivision of a State must be approved by Congress.
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderWhy would it be highly implausible to argue the following?
ANYTHING can be argued. But that is a highly implausible argument to say the least.
1) Every state, according to Article 4 of the US Constitution, has the right to subdivide subject to congressional approval.
2) Uniquely, the joint resolution admitting Texas to the union specifically recognised its right to subdivide into up to five states.
3) Since this recognition would be absolutely superfluous if it was merely intended to duplicate the provisions of the existing constitution, it must have been intended to add to them. The right to subdivide with congressional approval already exists so the joint resolution must have been intended to grant approval for any future subdivision that Texas might opt for.
4) Consequently, all the other states would have to ask congressional permission to subdivide, but Texas wouldn't.
There may be other interpretations, but surely any plausible interpretation should start from the fact that the joint resolution must have been intended to do more than simply duplicate existing constitutional provisions.
- Joined
- 03 Feb 07
- Moves
- 214767
Originally posted by TeinosukeI'm sure the people of Austin would love to secede.
The thread about a possible division of California set me thinking:
According to the Joint Resolution admitting Texas to the United States in 1845, Texas has explicit permission to subdivide into as many as five separate states:
[i]New States ... not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas ... may hereafter, by the consent of sai ...[text shortened]... verage on a national scale make it worth the state's while to exercise its right to subdivide?