They do this all the time. Maybe Biden should call their bluff, execute his powers as Commander in Chief, and order the National Guard in Texas to turn on State Police.
Oh look, that's so cute. A bunch of idiots who never read the constitution nor know of our history. Secession is illegal and cannot happen. The union is unbreakable. I live in Texas. Please liberate us.
Yeah, heading into the 2018 midterm Trump tried to create a border crisis. It didn't work. This is their election trick, create a lot of smoke, rile up the base, think that it will rile everyone else up.
I mean let's look at the core aspect of Abbott's argument from his statement.
That is why the Framers included both Article IV, § 4, which promises that the federal government “shall protect each [State] against invasion,” and Article I, § 10, Clause 3, which acknowledges “the States’ sovereign interest in protecting their borders.” Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387, 419 (2012) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
Right out the gate, Abbott is based his ideology on a dissenting opinion. That is, the NON-MAJORITY finding of the court in Arizona v. United States. In fact, Arizona v. United States indicated explicitly that enforcement of the border was the sole privilege of the Federal Government. So right out the gate Abbott is literally using a case that ruled the opposite of the determination he indicated in his statement.
Additionally, Art. I, § 10, C. 3 of the Constitution.
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
Historically this was used for Native American invasions of property and so the key factor in cases around this is "will not admit of delay". Texas is not burning. No historical read of this section of the Constitution supports immigrants coming into the Nation. By definition as we have it thus far, Texas is not being invaded. Additionally, Scalia's conceptualization of this section, no other Justice has joined in on that understanding. So outside of the opinion of a single justice, a Governor just saying "I'm being invaded! I get to invalidate federal law!" nobody else has ever indicated this is the way it should be read.
With Art. I, § 10, C. 3, you can say "I'm being invaded!" But you still have to follow the law. You can fight invaders and maintain the law of this land, they are not mutually exclusive things, no matter how hard Abbott or Scalia wishes it to be otherwise.
And finally, the Art. IV, § 4 argument.
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
Again, no court would uphold that Texas is being invaded. But Abbott is adamant about Biden "isn't enforcing…" And the thing is, Governors do not get to legally make that determination. What laws are and are not being enforced by a President is the sole prerogative of the Executive branch. (Wayte v. United States)
The Governor of Texas cannot just unilaterally make a determination that the President isn't XYZing. That's what the court system is for and distinctly the thing that Abbott has lost. If the Governor felt that the President was not holding up their end, they have every right under Article III of the Constitution to take it up there. Which that's what Abbott did and lost. Also, why when he was questioned if his defiance would be upheld by SCOTUS, he merely indicated that he felt the 5th Circuit would uphold it. Meaning, he knows that SCOTUS will overturn any determination the Governor is making on this front.
And with all of that, his core argument has nothing. It's easy to pick apart. Now here's the thing, Gov. Abbott is not stupid in the legal sense. He's quite aware that his determination is unfounded. He's banking on stirring the pot enough to make either Biden do something so that can be plastered all over the place or getting the issue fresh into his base's minds.
And like I said, this is exactly what they did 2018 and lost. Abbott is just trying to get under everyone's skin and he seems determined to spend as much of Texan taxpayers' money in litigation to do that one thing.
Great analysis. I genuinely think Abbott is also trying to make as much work available to conservative lawyers as possible, like a jobs program for assholes.
Again, no court would uphold that Texas is being invaded.
Which is good because if we classify border-crossing migrants as “invaders” then not only does that mean really bad things for them, it means Abbott was funneling invaders further inside our borders by paying to bus them to denver or fly them to chicago or whatever else.
It’s pretty clear he didn’t think the treasonous implications of this particular initiative through very well.
A second civil war would look nothing like the last one.
It’d look more like the Troubles in Ireland; with lots of terrorist attacks rather than well-defined battles. It would be neighbor-on-neighbor violence. A bunch of small paramilitaries running around ganking everyone else.
Republicans overestimate their own size. They’re not the 46.8% of Voters who voted Trump in 2020, they are a fraction of the 22.09% of total Americans. They will be crushed by the overwhelming nonpartisan majority in the case of open warfare.
While my heart sinks for the effected families, there has never been an easier time to uproot your life and leave Texas, Florida, or anywhere else. I myself have been planning to leave North Dakota for several years now.
Guess the point I’m trying to make is that any civil war that breaks out in the us is going to be a fucking bloodbath. There won’t be territory, or battle lines to get on the right side of (or just away from). There won’t be any where for civilians to go. Every city will be engulfed in insanity.
Nobody wins. It doesn’t matter who comes out in control, there will be no winners. Only death, destruction.
It’ll be chaos, and then it’ll be martial law. When there are no clean sides, no obvious distinction or front lines, entire cities/regions become internment camps. Everyone is suspect. Anyone could be one of them.
Scenes like this;
Persons with last names starting from CH to DO have the next 2 hours to do their weekly shopping, anyone without correct identification, displayed on their chest, is subject to arrest and indefinite imprisonment. Resistance will not be tolerated, try, defy and it’ll be the last time. Don’t be a hero, citizen, c’mon, keep the line moving. No talking to those not in your party. Don’t wander off the yellow line or the autosentries will turn you into a hazy pink mist. BRRRRAPP
If America balkanizes (cuz if we split, it won’t be into 2 it’ll be into several) there will never be peace in North America in any of our lifetimes. Those who are chomping the bit for it might do well to remember that of all the multipronged wars in history I don’t think there’s been a single one that was won by any of the original starting factions. So whomever is around at the beginning, that side, all those sides, have already lost. We just don’t know what terror will be birthed from their corpses that finally takes over.
I realize I’m the asshole for saying this, but we will have culled weakness from the herd by engaging with the traitors in combat, and the suffering there as a result very well may be lower than the suffering incurred by letting them continue their insanity for decades to come before they inevitably die off due to generational progress.
The real question is basically whether the pain is endured by us all or only their less fortunate targets. I am not afraid to share the suffering.
Imagine if more people stood up against the Nazis in the same manner. Do you think the Germans’ slow cascade into madness was a better alternative than war in the streets?
Because the Nazis totally just started with a civil war. If that’s what had happened, Nazis Germany would have collapsed in on itself, and not been able to do what they did. a hypothetical second US civil war is not even close to the same thing.
You somehow stumbled into a perfect understanding of what my stance is while not understanding that it is my stance.
The Nazis didn’t start with a civil war, it started with fascism’s slow rise to power as they began singling out minorities one at a time and the populace did fucking nothing about it until it was too late. That was my entire argument, that our options might soon between Civil War or a Fascist White Nationalist State. The collapse of Germany would have been preferable to the events of WWII.
Honestly, Ted Cruz stood before a podium this week and give a speech against the insanity of adding more Razorwire, mentioning that is has done nothing to prevent growing immigration numbers since they started putting it up. Fuck that guy, for real, but on this particular issue he is on our side.
Add comment