Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

No. They couldn't if they wanted to. There is no legal or constitutional basis for a state to secede. How would that even work? It's not like they can force people to leave the US and strip them of their citizenship. Are they just going to kick out over half the people in Texas? Besides Texas' economy would collapse immediately. There would be a mass exodus of businesses. Texas would be completely cut off from the national banking system. It's an absurd idea.


If it were to happen "legally", instead of "civil war II: the farce", I suppose the obvious bit would be to pass a constitutional amendment[1] to allow Texas to secede, probably after a Texit referendum. Presumably similarly to Brexit all the nitty gritty minor details like "not destroying the economy" can be worked out in negotiation between Texas and the USA, which will no doubt leave the newly independent Texas in a worse place and generally unhappy, but FREEEEEEEE.

[1] "Why would the other states ratify this?" you ask? Lets not quibble over minor details in silly make believe scenarios.


The article that allowed the UK to leave the EU was specifically crafted for the UK at the time they joined. The EU realized that mistake right away and removed it for future members.

No such agreement exists in the Constitution because having states come and go as they please would be incredibly dumb.


Huh? Article 50 is still there, and isn't a UK specific thing:

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A...

"Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements."

Wikipedia (at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_from_the_European_U...) notes that a formal method of leaving became a thing in the early 2000s when various Eastern European states were joining, not when the UK joined in the 1970s.

(As for the US, I did say actually passing a constitutional amendment to allow succession would be unlikely, but I don't think it's legally impossible?)


>As for the US, I did say actually passing a constitutional amendment to allow succession would be unlikely, but I don't think it's legally impossible?

Why would you need a constitutional amendment for more seasons of a popular TV show?

Even if the producers don't want to make any more episodes, all it would take is the money to acquire the rights to the show and pay for production costs. No Constitutional Amendment (or even a law) required.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: