Hypothetical from a non American. Let’s say Texas DOES secede. What happens to the citizenship of the Americans in Texas? Do they lose it? Do they have to leave Texas in X days to keep it? Can it even be revoked? Should it?
If they kept it, would they need to still declare their taxes, as US citizens must pay tax on international income?
They would become a territory, like Puerto Rico.
They would still have citizenship and the benefits of citizenship, such as they would still have taxes. But would not vote in presidential elections, and their representatives would get no vote.
You mean their politicians can just blame everything on the federal government and pretend they took their voting rights away? Sounds like a dream for them.
I’m not like a US civil war scholar or anything, but there’s at least a glimmer of precedence to be found there with what happened to average folk living in the Confederate States when those states seceded. Babies born in the Confederacy were considered US citizens because the US (the Union) never recognized the Confederacy as independent and legally considered it US territory still. As for adults, it was similar… The US treated them as if they had never lost US citizenship and either punished or pardoned people for treason and war related crimes after the war. So I guess the answer would depend on whether Texas wins or loses the inevitable war that the US would fight to keep Texas from seceding/declaring independence in the first place.
To add to that- it’s nearly impossible to lose American citizenship against one’s will. If you were born a citizen or earned it later, you will likely remain a citizen until you die, unless you give it up.
About inevitable war - I heard some mentions of Texas’ conditions of entering the union being different, since it, eh, became part of the US at a different point of history. And thus that in case of Texas specifically secession would still be their right.
Have you heard of such a thing?
Anyway would be awfully stupid to see a war over this.
It would make more sense for Texas to be like Christiania in Copenhagen for some time in case of such a weird event - no recognition, but also no war and no borders.
I mean, some Texans might think so. Maybe even Texan politicians. However, Texas tried it already. It was one of the slave states that seceded and got its ass kicked in the civil war. Generally, that’s the legal precedent that people refer to when they argue whether or not a state has the right to secede. The answer is war/no. That doesn’t mean it would have to result in that in the future, but I think the only way they could get it to work without violence would be by starting some devolution movement and getting the US constitution amended to allow Texas in particular to secede and that would require a constitutional convention and the consent of the majority of the other states. Otherwise, they’d have to win a war against the US.
However, Texas tried it already. It was one of the slave states that seceded and got its ass kicked in the civil war.
I’m not that ignorant of history to need to be informed about this …
but I think the only way they could get it to work without violence would be by starting some devolution movement and getting the US constitution amended to allow Texas in particular to secede and that would require a constitutional convention and the consent of the majority of the other states
I personally just don’t like centralism and don’t see secession as bad in theory. That, of course, means that not only a state should be able to secede from the union, but also any part of the state from it, etc.
Anyway, this is all not important. Healthy societies do well with any model (I’d say for a healthy society with any law there’d be no war in such an event). Unhealthy ones do bad with any model (even if there’d be laws designed to prevent war). Models affect their development and long-term “health”, though.
This is a common urban myth, but is untrue. There is no special part of the Texas state constitution that makes any mention of the ability to leave the USA. Nor is there anything in the USA constitution which would allow for this. It most likely comes from a clause in the document annexing Texas to the United States which allows for the state to break into multiple states. However this probably doesn’t bypass the normal process of granting statehood. So if for all practical reasons not a thing.
The other replies to you are wrong. Texas can’t secede. Unlike the EU, joining the United States is one-way. No matter what laws the Texas government passes, or claims to be true, from the perspective of the US gov’t they cannot leave the union (or revoke US citizenship from their residents).
If you’re looking for precedence, see the US civil war which settled the matter pretty decisively.
Hypothetical from a non American. Let’s say Texas DOES secede. What happens to the citizenship of the Americans in Texas? Do they lose it? Do they have to leave Texas in X days to keep it? Can it even be revoked? Should it?
If they kept it, would they need to still declare their taxes, as US citizens must pay tax on international income?
They would become a territory, like Puerto Rico. They would still have citizenship and the benefits of citizenship, such as they would still have taxes. But would not vote in presidential elections, and their representatives would get no vote.
It is the best of all worlds. /$
Taxation without representation you say?
You mean their politicians can just blame everything on the federal government and pretend they took their voting rights away? Sounds like a dream for them.
I’m not like a US civil war scholar or anything, but there’s at least a glimmer of precedence to be found there with what happened to average folk living in the Confederate States when those states seceded. Babies born in the Confederacy were considered US citizens because the US (the Union) never recognized the Confederacy as independent and legally considered it US territory still. As for adults, it was similar… The US treated them as if they had never lost US citizenship and either punished or pardoned people for treason and war related crimes after the war. So I guess the answer would depend on whether Texas wins or loses the inevitable war that the US would fight to keep Texas from seceding/declaring independence in the first place.
To add to that- it’s nearly impossible to lose American citizenship against one’s will. If you were born a citizen or earned it later, you will likely remain a citizen until you die, unless you give it up.
Even Jefferson Davis died an American citizen.
It’s even hard to willfully give up your citizenship.
About inevitable war - I heard some mentions of Texas’ conditions of entering the union being different, since it, eh, became part of the US at a different point of history. And thus that in case of Texas specifically secession would still be their right.
Have you heard of such a thing?
Anyway would be awfully stupid to see a war over this.
It would make more sense for Texas to be like Christiania in Copenhagen for some time in case of such a weird event - no recognition, but also no war and no borders.
I mean, some Texans might think so. Maybe even Texan politicians. However, Texas tried it already. It was one of the slave states that seceded and got its ass kicked in the civil war. Generally, that’s the legal precedent that people refer to when they argue whether or not a state has the right to secede. The answer is war/no. That doesn’t mean it would have to result in that in the future, but I think the only way they could get it to work without violence would be by starting some devolution movement and getting the US constitution amended to allow Texas in particular to secede and that would require a constitutional convention and the consent of the majority of the other states. Otherwise, they’d have to win a war against the US.
I’m not that ignorant of history to need to be informed about this …
I personally just don’t like centralism and don’t see secession as bad in theory. That, of course, means that not only a state should be able to secede from the union, but also any part of the state from it, etc.
Anyway, this is all not important. Healthy societies do well with any model (I’d say for a healthy society with any law there’d be no war in such an event). Unhealthy ones do bad with any model (even if there’d be laws designed to prevent war). Models affect their development and long-term “health”, though.
Idiots in Texas believe this. The well informed in Texas know this to be false AF.
This is a common urban myth, but is untrue. There is no special part of the Texas state constitution that makes any mention of the ability to leave the USA. Nor is there anything in the USA constitution which would allow for this. It most likely comes from a clause in the document annexing Texas to the United States which allows for the state to break into multiple states. However this probably doesn’t bypass the normal process of granting statehood. So if for all practical reasons not a thing.
The other replies to you are wrong. Texas can’t secede. Unlike the EU, joining the United States is one-way. No matter what laws the Texas government passes, or claims to be true, from the perspective of the US gov’t they cannot leave the union (or revoke US citizenship from their residents).
If you’re looking for precedence, see the US civil war which settled the matter pretty decisively.