By: Mark Glennon*
Much of Illinois, like politically similar parts of the nation, lives in a bubble, unaware or uncaring of how strongly opinions differ in other parts of the nation. It’s a consequence of living in what’s effectively a one-party state with most media aligned behind the local establishment. We live in an alternate universe from many parts of the country.
On one critical matter, potentially drastic consequences of November’s election are being particularly overlooked.
It’s the likelihood of demands in parts of America for a national separation, of sorts, if the federal government continues on its current path. Far more Americans than you probably know are sufficiently enraged to want their states to begin defying federal law. An election that brings more of the same will push still more past the breaking point.
That doesn’t mean the South is going to bomb Fort Sumter again or that another Civil War may be at hand. It means some states might essentially say, “Thanks, but we decline to follow particular federal laws and rulings we despise.”
If you think that’s farfetched, first, wake up to what’s already happening:
- Utah’s governor this year signed into law a bill establishing a full process for the state to defy federal rules and decisions. It’s called the “Utah Constitutional Sovereignty Act” and was passed by the Utah legislature last year. If the state choses to follow the procedures in that act respecting any particular federal directive, the Act prohibits government officers from enforcing or assisting in the enforcement of that federal directive.
- At least eight states are refusing to comply with new Title IX rules from the Biden Administration allowing transgender students to use restrooms, locker rooms and pronouns that match their gender identity.
- The State of Texas has taken border enforcement into its own hands, a power traditionally reserved mostly for the federal government. Though the legality of Texas’ actions is debatable and still in court, Texas has generally acted first and worried about lawsuits later.
- The Texas Republican party platform has a plank saying “federally mandated legislation that infringes upon the 10th Amendment rights of Texas shall be ignored, opposed, refused, and nullified” adding: “Texas retains the right to secede from the United States.”
- Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said in March that Florida would defy any federal extradition of Donald Trump stemming from Trump’s indictment in New York.
- At least eight states have passed laws purporting to void federal firearms regulations.
Second, be aware that shockingly high numbers of Americans already support their state going much further and actually seceding from the U.S., and it’s not just conservatives in the West and South.
A YouGov poll this year found nearly a quarter of Americans want their states to secede, with some states much higher. Alaska (36%) and Texas (31%) were highest, but California (29%) and New York (28%) were next highest. An earlier YouGov poll found that it’s mostly Democrats who want to secede in Pacific (47%) and Northeast (39%) states. The chart here shows those results by state, as reported in Newsweek.
An earlier YouGov Poll found a still higher portion of Americans wanting to secede — 37%. “Shocking poll finds many Americans now want to secede from the United States,” said a headline in The Hill reporting the poll.
You might still think notions of even a partial separation are nonsense because they would be unconstitutional. That may indeed be how courts would rule, though some measures rejecting federal authority might be upheld based on the Tenth Amendment, which says,“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
But talk about constitutionality misses the overriding basis on which claims to rights of separation would be asserted. That basis is the central point of the Declaration of Independence, which is that governments are “instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” and 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.” That right, as the Founders believed, comes not from the Constitution but from nature or God, however you prefer to see it.
That overriding right to defy national authority is only to be asserted in the most extreme circumstances. As the Declaration says, prudence “will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes.” For many Americans, however, it appears we have reached the threshold needed to justify at least a soft separation in the form of defiance of some federal rule, and the election may grow that sentiment to include majorities in some states.
If outright defiance of federal law becomes reality, the real questions would be what the federal government would do about it and how defying states would respond. It would depend on what was being defied, but the federal government could simply acquiesce to avoid a confrontation, as the Biden Administration seems to have done in response to border measures taken by Texas. If it didn’t acquiesce, it could perhaps withhold some federal funds flowing to the state. At the extreme, it could send in troops to enforce the law, as it did in Little Rock in 1957 to enforce school desegregation.
Maybe a defying state would back down in the face of any retaliation, small or large. Or maybe it would escalate. Hopefully, it would be resolved amicably. On the fiftieth anniversary of George Washington’s inauguration, former President John Quincy Adams gave a speech saying this about secession, but the same should be said about even smaller measures to reject specific federal rules:
If the day should ever come, (may Heaven avert it,) when the affections of the people of these states shall be alienated from each other; when the fraternal spirit shall give away to cold indifference, or collisions of interest shall fester into hatred, the bands of political association will not long hold together parties no longer attracted by the magnetism of conciliated interests and kindly sympathies; and far better will it be for the people of the disunited states, to part in friendship from each other, than to be held together by constraint.
Nobody should hope for the day that our differences become so severe that even a soft separation of some sort becomes policy in some states. Just know that the day may be closer than you think.
*Mark Glennon is founder of Wirepoints.
Expect no retraction or apology. This what they do.
The state’s existing buyout program for its own pensions is the precedent for Chicago, which should be a warning: Look out for similar exaggerated claims and shoddy analysis.
Mark, I was surprised you left out the issue that the states are most successful at defying federal law, the legalization of recreational marijuana. 24 states plus the District of Columbia have legalized recreational marijuana while it is still criminalized at the federal level.
Good point.
The color-coded map shows an Interesting but surprising grouping of states. How often do you see TX grouped with CA and NY on a color-coded map?
“Any people anywhere being inclined and having the power have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right — a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can may revolutionize and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit.” Abraham Lincln Annotation Speech in… Read more »
Identity politics compounded by intersectionality plus the oppressor-oppressed narrative seem to have captivated many voters in our polarized times. Income and wealth redistribution gain in appeal as the top 1% or 10% statistics are widely known. If the theorists are correct, the Robin Hood approach will, however, diminish economic growth and lead to unemployment. The Solid South vote for Democrats persisted for many decades based on a shared dislike for the Republican Lincoln, so I think it’s possible that Democratic control could endure if the Republicans’ predictions about inflation and an immigrant flood and increasing military challenges fail to materialize… Read more »
“We live in an alternate universe from many parts of the country.”
IOW, we are the real “Opposite Land” no matter what Captain Fax says.
When a entire state is hijacked and its citizens are bled dry due to excessive taxation then those citizens have a right to
Protect their property from seizures by
The state. We must to survive get rid of the
Democrats and the insane governing that
They have forced on us.
I love federalism and believe the federal government should have a much smaller role in the policies of the states. While the examples of states pushing back against the federal government are nice the feds have the power over the states because the states rely so much on federal money. Back in the 1980’s during Reagan’s term as president the federal government wanted all states to have 21 as the legal age for drinking alcohol. At the time the states determined this age and in Illinois it was 19 for beer and wine and 21 for hard liquor. In Wisconsin… Read more »
Two sovereign nations could be created from America 1.0, each with its own Constitution, civil and criminal codes and enforcement policies, and system of taxation. Each could have its own National currency, with of without a basis of reserves. Each New America could have its own immigration policy and border enforcement (New America 2.1 won’t need to defend the West Coast, will only need to defend the California/Nevada border). America 1.0 citizens and non-citizens and corporations would have 5 years to determine where they wish to declare citizenship, New America 2.0 or 2.1. People have been voting with their feet… Read more »
Insightful as always, Susan.
Because of Illinois’s extremely leftist policies, we plan to be moving soon to another conservative-friendly state. I am heartened by the prospect of living alongside like-minded people. The current insanity of the liberal agenda in this country is eroding everything my parents, grandparents and my family have done to make this nation a better, safer, enriched society. I pray the madness stops before it’s too late.
According to https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/more-150-years-texas-has-had-power-secede-itself-180962354/: “Article IV, Section 3, of the U.S. Constitution states that Congress must approve any new states. But Texas’ claim to an exception comes straight from the 1845 joint congressional resolution admitting Texas into the Union. It reads: “New States of convenient size not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas and having sufficient population, may, hereafter by the consent of said State, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the Federal Constitution.” Supporters of Texas division say this means that Congress pre-approved a breakup.” If nothing else,… Read more »
Did not Illinois already decline to cooperate with the feds in enforcing some laws regarding immigration status? (This was years before the feds decided to stop enforcement also.)
What is one to do when the law abiding, tax payers voice is ignored and they find themselves unable to defend themselves against criminals, see their money squandered on useless social welfare programs and have their children subjected to non- educational, left wing rhetoric at school as well as a gender fluid narrative? Divorce is painful, but it is usually for the best.
I’d be real happy if Cook county or the rest of the state just left Illinois!
We residents of Cook County would help you freeloaders pack your bags.
You’d miss us if we left.
I’m now looking forward to see you you residents of Crook County feel when the Chicago Schools don’t open this year or your hit with additional 2.9 BILLION on top of the huge deficit the Chicago schools already have. When your taxes triple, if they haven’t already doubled first, we will see who will be packing their bags.
Just keep pulling that blue handle!
We’ll keep you updated David.
We’ve been working on this for the past 6 years. Currently, New Illinois has 33 committees throughout the state representing 43 counties. Another organization, Illinois Separation Referendum, has been working to put an advisory referendum about splitting the state on county ballots. As of 2022, it had passed by a landslide in 26 counties. In November, it will be on the ballot in 7 more counties. What is interesting to note is that only 10 of the counties with committees and the counties with the referendum overlap. This means that there is an active state split movement in 66 of… Read more »
I fully expect, after Kamala wins in November, that many of her more inflammatory and woke executive orders will be summarily ignored by red states. She’ll try to enforce her orders in the courts, or by withholding federal money, which will ultimately result in stand-offs, like Texas did at Eagle Pass, putting up border fencing in defiance of the federal government’s and court’s rejection of the same. Fortunately, it’s a near lock for the Republicans to control the Senate even if they lose the house and the presidency, with the Democrat retiring in West Virginia that’s a guaranteed Republican state,… Read more »
What are you basing this on? While polls have been all over the place, states like Arizona and Pennsylvania have been gaining new Republican voters by a wide margin. To me, this means more than polls.
Check out the latest polls, Paula. Trump losing in those swing states.https://www.realclearpolling.com/latest-polls. And Trump seems to be doing his best to blow the election. I think this Frank Lutz piece is right:https://x.com/SquawkCNBC/status/1823680189542346793
and yet here is the ever annoying Frank Luntz continuing his rounds on the propaganda media, now on CNN, stating that his focus groups show the rank and file union members , aside from the teachers’ unions, don’t support their leftist leaders. Hardly blowing the election by quipping “you’re fired” , Mark
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2024/08/14/president-trump-continues-splitting-trade-union-members-away-from-trade-union-leadership/
I don’t think Trump is blowing the election anymore than Kamala is blowing the election. Democrats will show up in droves to vote for the brat because she’s cool and popular and has dancing energy. 90M votes is my guess making her the most popular president ever. Few voters need convincing to vote or not vote for Trump. The election, as nearly everyone agrees, will be decided by several hundred thousand votes, at most, in the swing states, which are generally notoriously difficult to poll. The reality, is that just like last time, the ballots will be counted and there… Read more »
Well Stated!
100-200 more years is overly optimistic. Things move a lot more quickly now than in Byzantine Empire days.
While the percentage gain of new republicans to new democrats is large, the overall number is small. Republicans added 20K new voters and democrats 5k. But Biden won the state by 80k votes, so even a small increase in republican voters could be meaningful if 2024 is as close as 2020 in Pennsylvania.
Trump lost AZ by 12,000 votes and PA by less than 100,000. Democrats can engineer a win for Kamala in those states with those kind of numbers, especially when the state is controlled by Democrats like PA and AZ. I would be shocked if Democrat former Sec of State, now Trump hating Gov. Katie Hobbs actually certified a vote for Trump with a less than 1% win. I hope I’m wrong, I really do, but I can’t imagine she would allow that to happen, same for Gretchen Witner the Gov of Michigan. Unlikely she’ll let a Trump victory in Michigan… Read more »
I believe Oregon has a very serious and real chance that most of the conservative eastern half of the state i.e., everything but the Portland metro, will join Idaho. Hoping the Oregon redrawing of state boundaries works – may be last hope for normal folks in IL.
Repeal the 17th Amendment and restore the ability of state legislatures to elect U.S. Senators. With more accountability to state legislatures, the Senate would focus legislation on issues of national importance as prescribed in the Constitution.
Yeah, right. You really think that making Senators accountable to a small group of 100-200 easily swayed/bribable politicians is going to make them any “more accountable” to their states that making them accountable to the voters will? The whole reason the 17th Amendment was passed in the first place was because wealthy plutocrats (including at least one in Illinois, of course) were literally buying their seats by bribing legislators.
Too funny. Do you seriously believe that congressmen and presidents have been any less corrupt since the 17th Amendment than the many more state legislators were before it? At least back then, you had to buy innumerable legislators in various competing states. Now, you just have to give a speaker’s husband a few insider trading tips, offer an ex-president a few speaking engagements or buy a few paintings from a coke-addled brat. Again, too funny. You’re just precious..
I never said politicians were less corrupt these days. The factor that “repeal the 17th Amendment” advocates always overlook is that prior to the 1960s, it was possible for states to model their legislatures after Congress by having a lower house with population based districts and an upper house with geographically based districts (e.g., one senator per county). This meant that non-urban areas had a counterbalance to the large urban areas, so arguably, the legislature really did represent the interests of the state as a whole. The SCOTUS, however, ruled in the early 60s that all state legislatures must be… Read more »
The 17th Amendment became effective in 1913, and the size and scope of the federal government has ballooned ever since without state legislatures holding U.S. senators accountable. The urban/rural redistribution of seats in state legislatures decades later would not have negated the fact that state legislatures would have resisted the federal government’s takeover of responsibilities and tax revenues and imposition of unfunded mandates.
“state legislatures would have resisted the federal government’s takeover of responsibilities”
Well, we’ll just have to agree to disagree on that point. I know our General Assembly doesn’t put up much resistance to “the federal government’s takeover of responsibilities”, at least as long as there’s a Democrat in the White House.
Yes, we agree to disagree. Your state legislature is one of the country’s most “Progressive” (i.e., regressive). Mine is not and would be very happy to shrink the federal government’s role to its Constitutional mandate.
Thank you for the article, Mark.
Seldom mentioned is the Democrat flouting of immigration law in “sanctuary” states and cities, which has been going on for years, if not decades!
It would be tempting to break into 2 nations if all the blue states were geographically next to each other as were all the red states. Ultimately though, it’s a horrible idea from a national defense perspective.
The upper Midwest and Rust Belt could have a “progressive” Blue corridor running roughly from Minneapolis down to Madison and Milwaukee, then to Chicago and the burbs, around the tip of the Lake, through South Bend, Lansing and Ann Arbor and ending at either Detroit or Cleveland.
Note to commenters: For the time being, we have to hold all comments for moderation before letting them go live. We’ve had some regular maliciousness from a few fakes posting nasty stuff (racist, gay bashing, antisemitic), often under the names of regular commenters, then claiming we approve those comments. This comment board is for discussion about policy and politicians. Stick to that and your comments will be approved, regardless of your viewpoint, subject to normal standards. Please use your real email addresses if you can when you comment because that helps us identify what’s legit more quickly. We get to… Read more »