Posted on Jun 21, 2022
Texas GOP's new platform says Biden didn't really win. It also calls for secession
1.34K
43
17
9
9
0
https://www.npr.org/2022/06/20/ [login to see] /texas-gops-new-platform-says-biden-didnt-really-win-it-also-calls-for-secession
Well I Guess at Least they are Consistent from 1860!
Well I Guess at Least they are Consistent from 1860!
Texas GOP's new platform says Biden didn't really win. It also calls for secession
Posted from npr.org
State of Texas
Republicans
Election 2020
Voting
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
3
3
0
Well they don't have the authority to do that, much as I might wish they would. Now hear me out. They secede, we make DC a new state, recognize Texas and then invade them the next day and make them a territory like PR. I like this plan... :D
(3)
(0)
SPC Kevin Ford
SSgt Joseph Baptist - It doesn't matter what the TX Constitution says. The federal Constitution has supremacy.
(4)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
“ The 10A makes it clear that, unless it is written in the Constitution, the federal government has no powers over the states.”
Things not mentioned in the Constitution:
Judicial review, secession, reading of Miranda rights, implied powers, executive orders are some of the notables.
Should the power of judicial review fall to the states? Should states determine whether or not Miranda rights are read?
From Texas v White:
“Considered therefore as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. The obligations of the State, as a member of the Union, and of every citizen of the State, as a citizen of the United States, remained perfect and unimpaired. It certainly follows that the State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union…”
Please point out in the decision where the Court claimed that TX lost its rights as a state due to seceding.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/74/700/#tab-opinion-1966289
Things not mentioned in the Constitution:
Judicial review, secession, reading of Miranda rights, implied powers, executive orders are some of the notables.
Should the power of judicial review fall to the states? Should states determine whether or not Miranda rights are read?
From Texas v White:
“Considered therefore as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. The obligations of the State, as a member of the Union, and of every citizen of the State, as a citizen of the United States, remained perfect and unimpaired. It certainly follows that the State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union…”
Please point out in the decision where the Court claimed that TX lost its rights as a state due to seceding.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/74/700/#tab-opinion-1966289
Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1868)
Texas v. White: States do not have the right to unilaterally secede from the United States, so the Confederate states during the Civil War always remained part of the nation.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
No one claimed they were.
Anyway, would you like to try to answer the questions posed to you?
“Should the power of judicial review fall to the states? Should states determine whether or not Miranda rights are read? “
“ Please point out in the decision where the Court claimed that TX lost its rights as a state due to seceding.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/74/700/#tab-opinion-1966289”
Frankly, you’re giving out incorrect information. And I’m giving you the opportunity to demonstrate your false claims.
The Supreme Court essentially determines if legislation/acts are Constitutional or not. You seem to be claiming that Texas v White is in the same neighborhood as dumpster fir decisions like Plessy or Dred Scott. Please provide evidence. Please refer to any legitimate academic or judicial source that equates Texas v white with Plessy or Dred Scott.
Anyway, would you like to try to answer the questions posed to you?
“Should the power of judicial review fall to the states? Should states determine whether or not Miranda rights are read? “
“ Please point out in the decision where the Court claimed that TX lost its rights as a state due to seceding.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/74/700/#tab-opinion-1966289”
Frankly, you’re giving out incorrect information. And I’m giving you the opportunity to demonstrate your false claims.
The Supreme Court essentially determines if legislation/acts are Constitutional or not. You seem to be claiming that Texas v White is in the same neighborhood as dumpster fir decisions like Plessy or Dred Scott. Please provide evidence. Please refer to any legitimate academic or judicial source that equates Texas v white with Plessy or Dred Scott.
Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1868)
Texas v. White: States do not have the right to unilaterally secede from the United States, so the Confederate states during the Civil War always remained part of the nation.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
The GOP are a bunch of retards, Abbot, Cancun Cruz, Gohmer, Paxton need to be voted out!! Come on Texas, let's get rid of the trash!!
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel The Texas sun must have gotten to these idiots! Once they succeed from the union will they apply for aid from the US Government to keep their Country solvent?
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google