Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,184 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 997,456
Pageviews Today: 1,402,645Threads Today: 270Posts Today: 7,107
02:00 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede

 
Eggcellent

User ID: 13043121
United States
11/13/2012 10:14 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
Read somewhere that Texas and Hawaii are the only ones(States)that didnt hand over their lands under their Treaties of Unionhood.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27662840




And I read somewhere years ago that the Seminole Indians of Florida were the only Indian Tribe which NEVER surrendered their sovereignty to the U.S. Government.

I could envision a whole bunch of Floridians suddenly discovering some Seminole in their ancestry!
"I have come to the conclusion that all news should be treated like 9/11, assume it is a psyop with actors participating in a staged event complete with props, until proven otherwise, in which case assume whatever is being recorded, reported, televised, is distortions/lying by omission/outright lies, until proven otherwise." - Anonymous, 4-13-12
IssueX

User ID: 14348632
United States
11/13/2012 10:21 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
"Texas v. White" won't matter two hoots.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, that was a victor's ruling and had it been handed down during the actual war (an impossible situation, and not germane to the details of the case, but this requires a stretch...) it would have held no weight.

TEXAS certainly considered themselves to have left the Union. This post-Civil War rewriting of history to achieve a political and monetary gain really has no bearing on our present reality.

The argument that "Texas can't secede because the Supreme Court in 1869 said they couldn't (nor could any other state)" would devolve to that of 12 dead men vs. an active and angry state. It is a pointless argument. It is like arguing with the weather.

Besides, a very valid argument can be made that "Texas v. White" is contrary to both the spirit and the letter of the text of the Declaration of Independence.

If Obama (or anyone, really) holds up and waves a copy of "Texas v. White", and Texas holds up and waves back with the Declaration of Independence, which do you think is the more important, more powerful document?

The innate rights of a self-governing people say "Texas v. White", as a practicality, is hogwash.

Also, if you want to get prickly about it, "Texas v. White" was about a claim made by the post-war, Federally-imposed Reconstruction government of Texas regarding some US bonds owned by Texas, therefore their additional holding - based merely upon accepting original jurisdiction - that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede could easily be revisited as having been an abuse of due process committed by an activist court, and had really nothing to do with the merits of the case.

In other words, having just won a bloody and brutal war, and wanting to prevent a relapse, it looks like the court took an unrelated but available opportunity to unilaterally impose their will, and in effect legislate from the bench.

I certainly don't blame them for having that mindset, and I'm quite glad the Union won the civil war. But bad case law is bad case law, and even if it was ROCK SOLID it would not matter in the least if secession efforts get strongly underway.
 Quoting: Shelgeyr


Exactly

they won't ask permission...or in the case of a possible breakdown in the Federal budget, it may well turn into every state for itself, a question of survival

Again, look at what happened to the USSR. In the 1960s they were using tanks and armies to squelch possible rebellions in satellite states

By 1991, provinces were breaking away, and there was nothing which could be done to prevent it

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

The most successful breakaway provinces were the oil and resource rich ones, fwiw

Everything is cyclical, and a badly managed, highly indebted federal government which fails to represent the will of the people, will have difficulties attempting to quell numerous provincial rebellions

this is doubly true if those provinces are richer than the central government

We are speaking hypothetically here, and I truly hope that the worst case scenarios do not manifest, the US dollar does not collapse and that extreme austerity measures aren't implemented next year

However, should push come to shove, people will not stop to ask permission to save their own lives....
Saddletramp
We Don't Rent Pigs...

User ID: 739427
United States
11/13/2012 10:25 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
This was more of a way to force the Southern States to take on their portion of the National Debt after the Civil War...

The ruling was not whether the states could secede, it was if they had indeed seceded in the eyes of the winner of the war...a distinct difference.
"And how can a man die better than facing fearful odds, for the ashes of his fathers, and the temples of his Gods..." ~ Horatius

"Because he told the truth, and once you've heard the truth, everything else is just cheap whiskey..."
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27441954
United Kingdom
11/13/2012 10:28 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
Has anyone thought that this is exactly what TPTB want,once you dissolve your union then your going too be picked clean one by one and each state will always want something different and will never agree on anything,you will then find out that you cant get back together again when things turn around.

Your all supposed to defend your entire country,its either all or nothing.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27660518
United Kingdom
11/13/2012 10:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
OK, so I just checked out the government site at [link to petitions.whitehouse.gov (secure)]

65k sigs in three daysshocked. So what happens now? how long has Obama got to respond and what could heppen if he refuses to?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 19333122
United States
11/13/2012 10:31 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
Texas can't use their nukes without the codes from the POTUS.
 Quoting: Leslie Zevo


That only applies to the ones that POTUS and USA know about.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21993077
United States
11/13/2012 10:31 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
Somebody stole your jet?
 Quoting: Lady Jane Smith


lol, no

my stolen money paid for that jet
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27656107


lmao
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27612677
United States
11/13/2012 10:34 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
[link to en.wikipedia.org]
Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869) was a significant case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869.[1] The case involved a claim by the Reconstruction government of Texas that United States bonds owned by Texas since 1850 had been illegally sold by the Confederate state legislature during the American Civil War. The state filed suit directly with the United States Supreme Court, which, under the United States Constitution, retains original jurisdiction on cases in which a state is a party.

In accepting original jurisdiction, the court ruled that Texas had remained a state ever since it first joined the Union, despite its joining the Confederate States of America and its being under military rule at the time of the decision in the case. In deciding the merits of the bond issue, the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null".



IMO they still got the right to secede... but they gonna have to fight for it...

In the nuclear age, they could secede and tell Washington DC to not move or Washington DC will be turned to glass.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27563645


Nice try dipshit, but as you and I both know laws mean nothing. In a nation of laws ruled by outlaws, who gives a shit what the laws say. It was also unconstitutional to force people to purchase things from another individual, aka health care. It is unconstitutional to take away a persons right to privacy, can you say patriot act, ndaa, tsa boys and girls. It's illegal to sell guns to the drug cartels, operation gun runner. It's also illegal to steal peoples money, MF global.

really nice try. Try this law on for size.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

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,[74] 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. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

I cite the following as to why exactly our government has become tyrannical.

1. taxation without any representation. The true rulers of our country are not on any ballot, in fact they buy and purchase the puppets that run what use to be our constitutional republic. I will never in my lifetime have the power to vote for my true ruler. The IMF, The Federal Reserve, The United Nations, and many others are not on my ballot.

2. The long abuse of this government participating in illegal wars, and illegal actions against the public. Operation Gunrunner, Growing Poppy in Afghanistan, Killing citizens without a trial, illegal search and seizures, seizing of lands, stealing of property.

3. I accuse the government of nothing less than outright theft. Stealing money from one citizen to give to another citizen or corporation is illegal, and unconstitutional. It is not charity, tax, or patriotic to have ones labor, energy stolen.

4. The Federal Reserve coining our currency and lending it to our government is illegal. Money is to be coined by congress, private individuals printing our currency into oblivion and charging us all tax through inflation is illegal. Who are these tyrannical individuals? They are not elected, and therefore do not represent me.

5. Most recent is the nullification of the constitution with bills like SOPA, NDAA, Patriot Act, all unconstitutional, and illegal acts.

These are all very real, and very precise charges. These are not light, or transient. They have not been levied without much thought, but they do explain what is wrong with our once proud nation. I am not unpatriotic, actually it is the opposite. I wish for our constitutional republic to be returned. For the power of the people to stand, for liberty and most of all freedom! None of the fore mentioned exist in this fascist United Government of American Slavery we exist under today.

In 1912 there was no Federal Income Tax (Federal Reserve Tax) NO Federal REserve (private banking cartel) and not much debt to mention. Now we are taxed slaves fighting banker wars and working our lives away for our masters to pay debts that are both fictional and are not ours to pay back. We are not cattle but free men. We do not need to bow to anyone. We are not Taxed Slaves!

What the Federal Reserve did to our once great nation was a violent overthrow of our constitutional GOvernment. This is not a revolution, this is a retaking of our rights, our freedoms, and our country. The revolution took place in 1912 and we lost. It's time to restore the republic for which it once stood.

Dear Government, YOUR FIRED!

Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21102346
United States
11/13/2012 10:34 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
"Texas v. White" won't matter two hoots.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, that was a victor's ruling and had it been handed down during the actual war (an impossible situation, and not germane to the details of the case, but this requires a stretch...) it would have held no weight.

TEXAS certainly considered themselves to have left the Union. This post-Civil War rewriting of history to achieve a political and monetary gain really has no bearing on our present reality.

The argument that "Texas can't secede because the Supreme Court in 1869 said they couldn't (nor could any other state)" would devolve to that of 12 dead men vs. an active and angry state. It is a pointless argument. It is like arguing with the weather.

Besides, a very valid argument can be made that "Texas v. White" is contrary to both the spirit and the letter of the text of the Declaration of Independence.

If Obama (or anyone, really) holds up and waves a copy of "Texas v. White", and Texas holds up and waves back with the Declaration of Independence, which do you think is the more important, more powerful document?

The innate rights of a self-governing people say "Texas v. White", as a practicality, is hogwash.

Also, if you want to get prickly about it, "Texas v. White" was about a claim made by the post-war, Federally-imposed Reconstruction government of Texas regarding some US bonds owned by Texas, therefore their additional holding - based merely upon accepting original jurisdiction - that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede could easily be revisited as having been an abuse of due process committed by an activist court, and had really nothing to do with the merits of the case.

In other words, having just won a bloody and brutal war, and wanting to prevent a relapse, it looks like the court took an unrelated but available opportunity to unilaterally impose their will, and in effect legislate from the bench.

I certainly don't blame them for having that mindset, and I'm quite glad the Union won the civil war. But bad case law is bad case law, and even if it was ROCK SOLID it would not matter in the least if secession efforts get strongly underway.
 Quoting: Shelgeyr


I think people have pointed to Texas vs White when it comes to debunking people who claim (Incorrectly) that Texas has some special clause that lets it leave the union leagaly. Obviously if all the people in Texas are dead set on leaving the union, no law is going to stop them.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 9266723


^^That^^

.. and many other states will domino in behind them

One observation I do have is this:

States wanting to secede are doing so because they wish to live by the US Constitution. With that said, why do they have to secede? Why not boot out the blue states that want their socialist system? It could be argued that the blue states have already seceded & are trying to force their agenda down the throats of the rest of the country.
 Quoting: Lady Jane Smith


I don't think so. It's like your tired of being married, you got the house the dog and had some kids and how you want to leave. The problem is you've taken on responsibilities and now you've decided you want out. Your decision now effects more then just you. Your kids are the innocent,who didn't ask for any of this and don't deserve it. We seem to take the easy road, don't want to put in the hard work. Marriage is like this county, you don't bail because sometimes is hard. You stand together and work it out. Just because your party didn't win, or there are things that need work, doesn't mean you take the easy way. If the first settlers would have taken the easy way we wouldn't be here. If you ever believed in this country. The question is do you think America is worth the hard work to save her.
Eggcellent

User ID: 13043121
United States
11/13/2012 10:38 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
I saw a thread here yesterday which had a link to the various State petitions. As an Oregonian I was pleased to see that Oregon is one of the States which seems to be growing a collective set of balls.

However, I believe that there are MANY more who support the idea than are willing to sign the petitions, because they are nervous about doing it. Common sense tells them that those petitions would just end up being lists of whom to "round up" first for the FEMA camps. Or WORSE (read between the lines) because the Gubb'mint would not want people in "their" camps who might foment revolution against them.

However, if it were put to a State or National vote and they could remain anonymous......

I have a feeling that there might be a LOT more votes in favor of seccession once that Obamacare Tax kicks in....

A LOT of people will be OBLIVIOUS until it affects them personally.
"I have come to the conclusion that all news should be treated like 9/11, assume it is a psyop with actors participating in a staged event complete with props, until proven otherwise, in which case assume whatever is being recorded, reported, televised, is distortions/lying by omission/outright lies, until proven otherwise." - Anonymous, 4-13-12
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27660518
United Kingdom
11/13/2012 10:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
OK, so I just checked out the government site at [link to petitions.whitehouse.gov (secure)]

65k sigs in three daysshocked. So what happens now? how long has Obama got to respond and what could heppen if he refuses to?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27660518


fkd my link, if you try to open it delete the final period (this guy: . ). Almost 69K now.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 424354
United States
11/13/2012 10:48 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
[link to en.wikipedia.org]
Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869) was a significant case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869.[1] The case involved a claim by the Reconstruction government of Texas that United States bonds owned by Texas since 1850 had been illegally sold by the Confederate state legislature during the American Civil War. The state filed suit directly with the United States Supreme Court, which, under the United States Constitution, retains original jurisdiction on cases in which a state is a party.

In accepting original jurisdiction, the court ruled that Texas had remained a state ever since it first joined the Union, despite its joining the Confederate States of America and its being under military rule at the time of the decision in the case. In deciding the merits of the bond issue, the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null".



IMO they still got the right to secede... but they gonna have to fight for it...

In the nuclear age, they could secede and tell Washington DC to not move or Washington DC will be turned to glass.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27563645

15 states, is not unilateral.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27448096
United States
11/13/2012 10:53 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
There's a book that came out I think back in the 80s about the break up of North America into something like six separate nations. In the northwest British Columbia, Washington State,Oregon, northern California became one country, New England states, New Brunswick, Maritime Islands Nova Scotia, Newfoundland became another country, and so-on.

It would be interesting to see if the Canadian government allowed Quebec to seceded from Canada, and if this would have some kind of domino effect. I think the U.S. and Canadian federal governments would do EVERYTHING in their power to prevent a state or province from seceding.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1474948
United States
11/13/2012 06:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
OK, so I just checked out the government site at [link to petitions.whitehouse.gov (secure)]

65k sigs in three daysshocked. So what happens now? how long has Obama got to respond and what could heppen if he refuses to?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27660518


I just tried your link to that page, and got, "The page you're looking for is currently unavailable to view".

Is the Obama regime already trying to squash the revolution?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 27304459
United States
11/14/2012 03:34 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: SCOTUS case Texas V. White or why states can't secede
...

I don't think so. It's like your tired of being married, you got the house the dog and had some kids and how you want to leave. The problem is you've taken on responsibilities and now you've decided you want out. Your decision now effects more then just you. Your kids are the innocent,who didn't ask for any of this and don't deserve it. We seem to take the easy road, don't want to put in the hard work. Marriage is like this county, you don't bail because sometimes is hard. You stand together and work it out. Just because your party didn't win, or there are things that need work, doesn't mean you take the easy way. If the first settlers would have taken the easy way we wouldn't be here. If you ever believed in this country. The question is do you think America is worth the hard work to save her.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21102346


It's more like we're tired of the debt and now we're really pissed off at the stolen election.

The effective way to solve these problems is to start over. We'll still be the same people, and we can even make a new compact among some or all of the States so that we don't get "picked clean".

News








Proud Member Of The Angry Mob