444

Texas’ Border Stunt Is Based on the Same Legal Theory Confederate States Used to Secede (www.thedailybeast.com)

submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

53 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A clash between Texas and the Biden administration over who controls the Texas-Mexico border continues to escalate this week as federal officials once again demanded the state give Border Patrol agents access to a park that is a popular corridor for migrants to enter the United States illegally.

This comes in response to a recent Supreme Court decision, where the court allowed federal officials to dismantle a wire barrier along the border, prompting a legal battle initiated by Texas. Texas argued that this action, aimed at aiding migrants, infringes on state sovereignty and damages Texas security measures.

In response to this decision, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott released a letter arguing that Texas has a right to control the border and that it supersedes federal government control. Abbott’s accusation that the federal government has breached the Constitution by having “broken the compact between the United States and the States” is almost identical to South Carolina’s 1860 declaration of secession.

Furthermore, Abbott’s letter espouses the fringe theory of constitutional law known as “compact theory,” popularized by Confederate states during the Civil War era and supported by Confederate President Jefferson Davis.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] ToastedPlanet 4 points 9 months ago

If they are given the ultimatum of “Get the fuck back in the US or we are claiming spacex” then they very rapidly are “punished”.

Sure, that hurts Elon Musk. I would be interested to know how many of the Republican politicians in red states actually have a majority of their wealth and assets in blue states. Sanctions have to hurt the people in control of the red state governments to even be worthwhile.

Because… it is so much cheaper because they aren’t paying for social infrastructure and they get a lot of the NIMBY benefits while pretending they are “good people”. LOTS of DINOs. They might not be full alt-right magats but there is a reason that the blatant gerrymandering and voter disenfranchisement doesn’t have much pushback.

I'm not convinced this disqualifies them from our sympathy if a hypothetical secession attempt by their state government causes them undue misery. I've been looking into people moving to Texas.

This is one of the articles I found. It seems like most of the people moving to Texas are going to vote Republican. I would like to read the articles you've seen on the topic as I couldn't find much on Democrats moving to Texas other than this one. At the end it mentions one family moved to Austin and they seem progressive. It's an interesting demographic shift regardless.

But also understand that places like Austin would very much vote for a “moderate Bush-era republican” if the option arose.

Again I don't have a lot knowledge about Democrats in Texas. It seems like if that were true they would run some neo-conservatives that were like Bush. These are the candidates that the Democratic Party is fielding against Ted Cruz in Texas.

They seem progressive, on the surface anyway. Especially this guy:

“I’m a progressive and I do not apologize for it,” Gutierrez said. “That’s the way we win in November, not by moving to the middle, but by inspiring every Democrat in this state to go get new voters and go meet these people.”

I would interested to read any polling date or news articles you've seen about it to be more informed on this.

this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2024

444 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19120 readers

2054 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News