A loud minority of Texans call for Independence, which is not really possible as far as I know, BUT could the Rest of the USA just kick another state (Not necessary Texas) out? Or is this also not possible?

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    You could just pass an amendment…

    But specifically for kicking a state out I don’t think the bar is that high. If the legislature and executive agreed then it could be done very quickly.

    • dhork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Oh, but there are all sorts of details to work out…

      • are citizens of the state no longer US citizens?
      • if so, what happens to their Social Security? Medicare? I don’t want to keep paying for those freeloaders
      • if they treat it like renouncing citizenship, they make those people pay taxes on all their assets and 401(k) holdings before leaving
      • Do armed forces members from those states now get kicked out of the US armed forces and go to the new state’s armed forces?
      • Does the new state get to take over any military bases and Federal buildings?
      • Can the rest of us build a wall on the border and make them pay for it?

      There’s a lot to iron out. The Brits got screwed with Brexit, and they weren’t even leaving a country.

      • lordnikon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        it was worse than that and even dumber the UK was a founding member and had extra perks. That other EU members didn’t get and they threw all that away. Even if they do join back they will never get that deal again.

        • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          Even if they do join back they will never get that deal again.

          and yet it’s still the most logical thing for them to do, security, trade and otherwise. it’ll hurt a bit, that sting is pride lol… but it’d still be the best thing for both the UK and EU.

          otherwise eventually I see Ireland unifying and Scotland going to the EU lol.

    • HandBreadedTools@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      No lol your second statement is literally just wrong. The only way to do anything like this would be through an Amendment, which equated to literally changing the rules bc the current rules do not allow for it.

    • Jojo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      “Just” passing an amendment requires more than 75% of states to ratify the amendment. So even if all of Congress decided nuts to Delaware, we’re moving them out, it would still go to the state of legislatures to be formalized

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Oh no the amendment is for if a state wants to leave. Since there’s no standard around kicking a state out at all, it defaults to 50+1 votes in Congress and a President willing to enforce it

        • Jojo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          I expect at the very least you’d also need scotus to agree, though if legislative and executive are both willing to ignore them then …profit?

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yeah that’s the checks and balances. SCOTUS literally has no power without Congress or the President.

            • Jojo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Yeah, but it wouldn’t be “legal” unless scotus agreed it was, even if it happened anyway.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                No. SCOTUS does not have to agree to everything. In fact there’s no Constitutional power for them to take a law up for review without a case. They gave themselves that power.

                • Jojo@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  I find it implausible there would be no challenge, so scotus would have to agree either passively by refusing to take the case or actively by taking it in order for its legality to be settled.

                  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    And I find it implausible that anybody listens to SCOTUS if we’ve gotten to the point that at least half of Congress is kicking a state out. It’s certainly not a normal political environment at that point.