Secession on the Ballot This Week … Almost

We are deep in the 2024 presidential primary season, and tomorrow is, among other Super Tuesday votes, the Republican and Democratic presidential primaries for Texas. Voters across the state will indicate who they want to be each major party’s choice come November. However, I want to talk about what is not on the ballot, but almost was. A measure almost made the Republican Party’s 2024 Texas primary ballot to measure whether party members would support secession from the United States.

Wait a minute! Emerging Civil War’s community is likely aware there was a war about secession’s legitimacy in 1865. There are people across Texas, and many other states, who think the issue should be revisited. In the Lone Star State, modern secessionists identify themselves as the Texas National Movement, commonly known as TEXIT.

The Texas National Movement’s website explains that its mission to “secure and protect the political, cultural, and economic independence of the nation of Texas and to restore and protect a Constitutional Republic and the inherent rights of the people of Texas.”[1] The group claims over 619,000 registered supporters.

It may not have made many national headlines, but the TEXIT movement has been actively seeking a nonbinding referendum on the Texas Republican primary. One hundred thousand signatures were needed for the Texas Republican Party to consider the proposal. Movement leader Daniel Miller said in 2023 he accumulated 170,097 signatures, but many were disqualified. Ultimately, Miller turned in 139,456 signatures in mid-December 2023.[2] The Texas Republican Party then considered adding the proposal to their primary. They chose not to.

Recent history has had a string of support for Texas secession. Richard McLaron, leading an organization called Republic of Texas, was arrested in 1997 after taking hostages and declaring Texas never legally joined the United States. In 2021, House Bill 1359, titled “An act related to proposing a referendum to the people of the State of Texas on the question of whether this state should leave the United States of America and establish an independent republic,” was introduced in the state legislature, referred to the State Affairs Committee, and was quickly ignored.[3] The sitting Texas Commissioner on Agriculture has signed the Texas First Pledge to “vote for legislation and resolutions to call for a vote on Texas reasserting its status as an independent nation.”[4]

There is a lot of Civil War era history to unpack related to TEXIT. In fact, several actions were undertaken as the Civil War ended to permanently settle this issue:

1. The United States won a war to settle this issue.
2. The Supreme Court declared secession illegal.
3. Texas relinquished its own claims to secession.

First the war. Texas representatives, though notably not then-Governor Sam Houston, signed an ordinance of secession. A referendum later certified it with 46,000 Texans voting for secession while less than 15,000 voted against it. It must be remembered though that those were only registered Anglo men in the state.[5] Ultimately, the Confederacy’s loss in the conflict settled the issue of secession in the United States by force.

The TEXIT FAQ page addresses this in a way, with the question “Will the Federal Government Use Military Force to Stop TEXIT?” The group’s answer is “One cannot reasonably assume that the policy of the federal government from the mid-19th century would be the policy of the federal government two decades into the 21st. There is no current federal policy regarding a State leaving the Union.”[6] Not quite though, as the United States has always held secession as illegitimate. Regardless, assuming the Federal government would remain inactive seems a bit farfetched.

Next comes the 1869 Supreme Court case of Texas v. White. Officially The state of Texas v. George W. White, John Chiles, John A. Hardenberg, Samuel Wolf, George W. Stewart, the branch of the Commercial Bank of Kentucky, Weston F. Birch, Byron Murray, Jr., and Shaw, this case was made over disputes regarding the sale of U.S. bonds by secessionist Texas. Texas sued to recover the value of these sold bonds, bringing up the question of whether the secessionist government was legitimate when it sold said bonds.

The Supreme Court’s majority opinion, written by Abraham Lincoln-appointee Salmon Chase, affirmed, “When Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States.”[7]

TEXIT has a FAQ addressing this case titled “Didn’t the Supreme Court Declare Secession Unconstitutional?” The TEXIT answer declares “The entire legal argument for the unconstitutionality of States leaving the Union rests on the Supreme Court’s decision in the 1869 case of Texas v. White. … Embracing Texas v. White requires one to believe the last 150 years never happened.”[8] Such an argument would also invalidate the Supreme Court power of judicial review since that power resulted from a case in 1803. For legal purposes, the fact that a law or ruling is old is not justification to discard it. To add, unpacking an entire Supreme Court case in a single sentence or two as I just did only skims the surface of a much deeper discussion.

Finally, there are statements by Texas itself. Texas has a history of secession before the Civil War via independence from Mexico. There is the famed statement that when Texas joined the United States, it did so with the caveat it could later split into numerous entities. This is in part true, as the joint resolution annexing Texas declared “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.”[9] At best this Congressionally-approved resolution satisfied the part of the U.S. Constitution requiring the Federal government to approve creating new states from existing territory, though not the requirement that Texas would also have to approve said division.

One more thing to ponder, and one most coverage of TEXIT has completely ignored, is that Texas has previously admitted it has no right to secede. Ordinance Number One of the 1866 state constitution states “That we acknowledge the supremacy of the Constitution of the United States, and the laws passed in pursuance thereof; and that an ordinance adopted by a former Convention of the people of Texas on the 1st day of February, A.D. 1861, entitled ‘An Ordinance to dissolve the Union between the State of Texas and the other States, united under the compact styled ‘Constitution of the United States of America,’ be and the same is hereby declared null and void; and the right heretofore claimed by the State of Texas to secede from the Union, is hereby distinctly renounced.”[10] Similar language appeared in the 1869 constitution.[11]

So, Texas has admitted secession from the United States was null and void, and it no longer had a right to secede. It must also be noted however, that these constitutions were written during the state’s Reconstruction and all seceding states had to include such language to be considered for full readmission. It must also be noted that the current state constitution from 1876 does not contain this language. Nonetheless, Texas has previously admitted it no longer possesses any secession rights.

Whether you think fighting the Civil War, the Supreme Court case Texas v. White, or previous admissions by Texas that the state cannot secede is enough to prevent future secession activity, one thing can certainly be taken away from TEXIT’s attempts to bring forth a larger secession argument. Any thoughts on such an issue today must be understood in the context of secession activity 160 years ago. Ultimately, the question of secession is still a hot topic amongst some in the United States, and a greater understanding of the U.S. Civil War, its causes, and its consequences are warranted.

Endnotes:

[1] “About the Texas National Movement,” https://tnm.me/about/, accessed January 16, 2024.

[2] Michael Karlis, “Texas National Movement wastes time getting ‘TEXIT’ on Republican primary ballot,” San Antonio Current, December 19, 2023, accessed January 16, 2023.

[3] Legislative Session 87(R), HB 1359, https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/history.aspx?LegSess=87R&Bill=HB1359, accessed January 16, 2024.

[4] “The Texas First Pledge” and “Texas First Pledge Signers,” Take Texas Back, https://taketexasback.com/candidates/?_office_level=statewide, accessed January 16, 2024.

[5] Joe T. Timmons, “The Referendum in Texas on the Ordinance of Secession, February 23, 1861: The Vote,” East Texas Historical Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, 15-16.

[6] “Will the Federal Government Use Military Force to Stop TEXIT?,” https://texit.tnm.me/u-s-texas-relations/will-the-federal-government-use-military-force-to-stop-texit/, accessed January 16, 2024.

[7] Chase, Salmon Portland, and Supreme Court Of The United States. U.S. Reports: Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 7 Wall. 700. 1868. Periodical. https://www.loc.gov/item/usrep074700/.

[8] “Didn’t The Supreme Court Declare Secession Unconstitutional?,” https://texit.tnm.me/can-texas-leave-the-union/didnt-the-supreme-court-declare-secession-unconstitutional/, accessed January 16, 2024.

[9] “Joint Resolution for annexing Texas to the United States,” March 1, 1845, Richard peters, Ed. The Public Statutes at Large of the United States of America, (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1856), Vol. 5, 798.

[10] Ordinance Number 1, The Constitution, As Amended, and Ordinances of the Convention of 1866, (Austin, TX: Jo. Walker, 1866), 33.

[11] Section 33, Constitution of the State of Texas, (Austin, TX: Daily Republican Office, 1869), 39.