In April, the top movie in America depicted a scenario where Texas and California seceded from the United States, resulting in brutal violence and thousands of deaths in the film titled Civil War.
Director Alex Garland’s vision, as praised by Variety‘s Peter Debruge, raised questions about the ability of people to get along, especially amidst deep political divisions during a presidential election year. The film echoed Rodney King’s famous question, suggesting that maybe not everyone can get along, and perhaps they shouldn’t have to.
In January, the tragic deaths of Victerma de la Sancha Cerros and her two children highlighted the ongoing conflict between state and federal authorities. The deaths near Eagle Pass, Texas, sparked controversy as Texas Army National Guard troops blocked federal Border Patrol agents from attempting a rescue, escalating tensions between state and federal entities.
Texas, known for its independent streak, has clashed with the federal government over border control measures. Governor Greg Abbott’s Operation Lone Star aimed to curb illegal crossings, leading to legal battles and physical standoffs with federal authorities. The state’s actions have been met with lawsuits from Washington, further deepening the divide.
The legal disputes, including cases such as U.S. v. Abbott and U.S. v. Texas, revolve around Texas’ assertion of state authority in border matters, challenging federal oversight. The ongoing legal battles reflect the broader ideological and constitutional conflicts between state and federal powers.
As tensions escalate, calls for independence from groups like the Texas Nationalist Movement have gained momentum, with demands for a statewide referendum on secession. The push for independence reflects growing discontent with the current state of affairs and the perceived failure of the union to address key issues.
Meet the Secessionistas
Founded in 2005, the Texas Nationalist Movement advocates for independence and self-governance, garnering support from over 600,000 registered supporters. The organization operates on grassroots funding and community engagement, hosting events and advocating for legislative measures aligned with their mission of independence.
With a growing following and increased visibility, groups like the Texas Nationalist Movement represent a broader sentiment of dissatisfaction with the status quo and a desire for greater autonomy and self-determination.
He says that our independence movement is a massive operation that has gathered over $24,000 so far through the PAC portion of the operation by the end of the second quarter of this year, and none of it had been spent by that time. The TNM asks politicians to sign the “Texas First Pledge,” which prioritizes the interests of Texas and Texans above all others, supports the right to alter or abolish the government, advocates for a referendum on independence, and aims to facilitate a fair separation of Texas from the federal government if the referendum is successful. Nearly 200 candidates have signed the pledge, with the majority being former or current candidates rather than current officeholders.
According to Miller, polling numbers indicate strong support for independence among Republicans, as well as a majority of both Democrats and Republicans. He believes that if the issue were put to a vote, independence would win by a significant margin. The legal basis for this movement, dubbed “Texit” by Miller, rests on Article 1, Section 2 of the Texas constitution, which affirms the people’s right to alter or abolish their government as they see fit.
Despite the enthusiasm in Texas for this movement, secession is a settled matter nationally, as per the Supreme Court’s 1869 decision in Texas v. White, which declared that Texas remained part of the Union even during the Confederacy. Levinson, a constitutional scholar, believes that the possibility of secession is more about political power and circumstances rather than constitutional law. He notes a growing interest in the idea of secession in scholarly circles across the political spectrum.
Although there is platform support within the state GOP for a referendum on independence, party leaders have hindered efforts to bring the issue to a vote. The TNM faced obstacles in getting the required number of signatures validated for a referendum, leading to a legal battle that was ultimately declined by the Texas Supreme Court. Miller contends that despite the support for independence, they are up against an establishment that is resistant to letting the issue go to a vote. He worried that the question could attract individuals who typically don’t vote in the GOP primary, such as moderate voters who might be motivated to vote against it. This could overshadow or negatively impact other key issues, like school choice, for a Republican Party that is aiming to move further right on various topics where non-secessionists may disagree with Rinaldi’s preferred stances. Voting for senators from New York, California, or Pennsylvania is not an option for us. While the secession movement led by Miller avoids a clear right-wing label, many conservative-coded issues fuel the belief that red states do not belong in a blue-dominated nation. Disputes over gender transitions and expressions that deviate from traditional norms can spark controversy in Texas.
While the Biden administration aims to prevent health care discrimination based on gender identity, Abbott in Texas advocates for criminal charges against those involved in gender-affirming care for minors. He also supports prohibiting teachers from wearing clothes not traditionally associated with their birth-assigned gender, and applauds state universities for banning drag shows on campus. The enforcement of a law in 2023 that indirectly targeted drag shows was halted by a federal judge, further highlighting the cultural divide between Texans and the administration’s protransgender stance.
Some members of Congress and the Libertarian Party endorse the concept of secession under the guise of “national divorce.” American libertarians have long viewed secession as a means to challenge centralized power, but this approach overlooks individual residents’ interests within a state. State-level secession fails to address the root causes of political polarization in America. The question remains whether seceded states would truly be more free, as they may face financial challenges and restrictions on civil liberties.
The prospect of a peaceful secession raises concerns about the federal government’s response. Miller argues that using force to block secession would be hypocritical given the U.S.’s historical support for self-determination in foreign conflicts. A potential U.S.-Texas conflict could lead to military disobedience, as some members of the armed forces may refuse to engage in such actions. Texas may be the first state to consider leaving the Union, but if the federal government were to use the military to suppress the outcome, it would likely not be the last. Polls presented by Miller may indicate that there is a desire among the American people for states to have the ability to secede, but author Buckley of “American Secession” argues that these polls may not accurately reflect the seriousness and consequences of such an action. Expressing discontent with other states or Americans to a pollster is one thing, but actually voting on secession is a different matter entirely. Buckley questions whether issues such as disagreements over events like drag queen story hour are significant enough to warrant a state seceding from the Union. The article was originally titled “Texit, Stage Right.”
Source link
