You are here: HomeU.S. NewsConstitutionCitizens From Over 30 States Submit Secession Petitions to White House
Tuesday, 13 November 2012 17:45

Citizens From Over 30 States Submit Secession Petitions to White House

Written by 

Seventy-seven thousand seven hundred and thirty-two people have signed the petition created by a citizen of Texas to secede from the union.

The petition, posted on the White House website, lays out the signatories' reasons for seeking to separate from the United States and form its own independent government:

The US continues to suffer economic difficulties stemming from the federal government's neglect to reform domestic and foreign spending. The citizens of the US suffer from blatant abuses of their rights such as the NDAA, the TSA, etc. Given that the state of Texas maintains a balanced budget and is the 15th largest economy in the world, it is practically feasible for Texas to withdraw from the union, and to do so would protect it's citizens' standard of living and re-secure their rights and liberties in accordance with the original ideas and beliefs of our founding fathers which are no longer being reflected by the federal government.

At the time of writing this article, individuals from 33 states have filed similar petitions calling for secession.

The “We, the People” program includes a “create a petition” tab on the White House website. The explanation of the site claims that "if a petition gets enough support," — more than 25,000 signatures within 30 days — the "White House staff will review it, ensure it's sent to the appropriate policy experts, and issue an official response." The Houston Chronicle reported that “shortly after 2:30 p.m. Central time on Monday, the [Texas] petition passed that threshold.”

Since that report, Louisiana’s petition has also crossed the 25,000 signature threshold.

Regardless, President Obama has made no statement regarding the crescendo of calls to bust up the union.

Although Texas Governor Rick Perry in 2009 said “one of the deals” made at the time Texas entered the union was that the Lone Star State could leave at any time, a spokeswoman for the former GOP presidential candidate repudiates that position and declares the governor’s preference for union. 

In a statement released to the Dallas Morning News, spokeswoman Catherine Frazier wrote:

Gov. Perry believes in the greatness of our Union and nothing should be done to change it. But he also shares the frustrations many Americans have with our federal government. Now more than ever our country needs strong leadership from states like Texas, that are making tough decisions to live within their means, keep taxes low and provide opportunities to job creators so their citizens can provide for their families and prosper. We cannot allow Washington’s tax and spend, one-size-fits-all mindset to jeopardize our children’s future, undermine our personal liberties and drive our nation down a dangerous path to greater dependence of government.

States whose citizens are expressing their frustration with the union and an increasingly overreaching and tyrannical federal government include (with signature count):

Louisiana, 28,880; Texas, 77,732; Florida, 22,181; Alabama, 20,549; North Carolina, 19,452; Kentucky, 12,719; Mississippi, 12,731; Indiana, 13,394; North Dakota, 8,812; Montana, 9,838; Colorado, 14,681; Oregon, 10,429; New Jersey, 9,988; New York, 11,326; South Carolina, 15,653; Arkansas, 14,948; Georgia, 21,206; Missouri 12,659; Tennessee, 19,875; Michigan, 13,370; Oklahoma, 11,580; Nevada, 6,371; Arizona, 12,451; Pennsylvania, 8,061; Delaware, 4,876; South Dakota, 2,014; Nebraska, 2,434; Kansas, 3,340; Alaska, 3,424; California, 6,181; Utah, 4,465; West Virginia, 2,257; Wyoming, 4,543. 

Those numbers increase by the minute, so check whitehouse.gov for updates.

In nearly every petition, reference is made to the Declaration of Independence. For example, the Alabama petition reads:

As the founding fathers of the United States of America made clear in the Declaration of Independence in 1776:

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

“…Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute new Government…”

While the announcement of intent to dissolve political bands has historic precedence, a request for permission is unique and constitutionally unnecessary.

In a statement made in wake of Governor Perry’s apparent support for secession in 2009, Congressman Ron Paul said that those who consider secession treasonous, “don’t know their history.”

“It’s a very American tradition; it’s very American to talk about secession,” Paul said.

Reminding viewers of the support given by the government of the United States to the secession of former Soviet republics from the Soviet Union, Paul said that America came into being by seceding from Great Britain.

“Secession is a good principle,” the former presidential candidate said.

Apart from outright secession — which is the right of states — there is, of course, an intermediate “rightful remedy” to the federal government’s constant encroachment into the sovereign territory of states: nullification. 

This generation is subjected as none before them to the painful injection of government into every fiber of the body politic. On what seems like a daily schedule, the Congress passes and the president signs into law measures ostensibly permitting the manhandling of people at airports, the suspension of the requirements of due process, and the monitoring by the never-blinking eye of a surveillance state into the virtual and actual behavior of anyone believed to one day possibly pose a threat to the security of “the homeland.”

As they sift among the various legal methods available to them for the civil combat against economic enslavement and the federal government’s intrusions into every aspect of our lives, they have stumbled across this timeless principle of self-defense used by our Founding Fathers to fight their own battle against the forces of federal oppression.

Simply stated, nullification is a concept of legal statutory construction that endows each state with the right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal measure that a state deems unconstitutional. Nullification is founded on the assertion that the sovereign states formed the union, and as creators of the compact, they hold ultimate authority as to the limits of the power of the central government to enact laws that are applicable to the states and the citizens thereof.

As Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist, No. 33:

If a number of political societies enter into a larger political society, the laws which the latter may enact, pursuant to the powers intrusted [sic] to it by its constitution, must necessarily be supreme over those societies and the individuals of whom they are composed.... But it will not follow from this doctrine that acts of the larger society which are not pursuant to its constitutional powers, but which are invasions of the residuary authorities of the smaller societies, will become the supreme law of the land. These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such. [Emphasis in original.]

The principle of nullification is set forth most cogently in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798. These calls for the rejection by states of the Alien and Sedition Acts were written by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, respectfully.

Nowhere therein do Madison and Jefferson express a desire to weaken the union or violate the Constitution. To the contrary, their express purpose is to “prevent unjust and unconstitutional assumptions of Congressional power.”

As a matter of fact, Jefferson argued that if states were to secede and form a new, separate confederation, “the same difficulties might occur in the smaller union; and finally each unit fall apart into its colonial condition.” 

Lest we forget, the Kentucky Resolutions were drafted by the author of the Declaration of Independence and the Virginia Resolution was written by the Father of the Constitution. These were no disloyal or seditious separatists. Their intent, their express and elegantly phrased intent, was to prevent the union they helped form from devolving into an oligarchy whose reign would be more oppressive and tyrannical than George III ever devised in his most power-addled fantasy.

 

Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a former constitutional attorney and professor of American government. He travels the country speaking on issues of states rights, nullification, and the surveillance state.

7 comments

  • Comment Link voiceofthenameless Wednesday, 14 November 2012 09:10 posted by voiceofthenameless

    I wonder how many of those who have signed the petition will now be considered Hostiles/terrorists...

  • Comment Link Madeleine Wednesday, 14 November 2012 06:26 posted by Madeleine

    John, it is peoples right to protest, they dont' have to be moved out of the state because they do. In our constitution it says we can sign a petition , they already have the votes they need, and you can remoive everyone from office and start again, , in this case they want to secede, not just one state, there are now 40, 10 states less then the whole union, do you think all those people are wrong and you are right? they should be removed ? how about removing the Government that is enslaving its citizens and stealing their money and have a usurper making up huge Medical care programs that will never work but you will go broke while they try, not for med reasons but for control reasons, Between the usurper and the leeches, the UN, there is no way a normal person can live like this. People are not arguing over anything, they want their rights, maybe we ought to keep the people who don't want their rights out of the places that do. that seems fair.

  • Comment Link DR ERIC Tuesday, 13 November 2012 18:25 posted by DR ERIC

    THE PETITION IT'S A CRIME NOT TO SIGN...GUARANTEES TO ELIMINATE TEH DEFICIT, LOWER CRIME RATES, AND PLATINUM STANDARD THE U.S. DOLLAR (AS DR. EINSTEIN'S "RELATIVITY" USDA, USP, .999 FINE, AND GOLD STANDARDED IT)!!!


    REPASS THE STILL-DUE 1776 DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE: IT'S STILL THE ONLY LEGAL-RECESSION {http://www.Repass1776Declaration.Blogspot.com} AND A CRIME TO FAIL TO SUPPORT AND DEFEND!!! (In Fact, Opposition To This 1st Consitution's The Reason For The Bogus-Elections and the Deficit)..BE SURE and Tell All Your Friends To Sign The Only Legal Secession Petition, Today!!! at http://wh.gov/XqED ADD YOUR NAME TO THE "FOUNDING FATHERS LIST", NOW (Repass the STILL-DUE 1776 Declaration of Independence Campaign)!!!


    It's true, like Georgia in 1787, states have the right not to pay taxes, until their grand juries are working properly, under "TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION" auspices.....but, it's your local grand juries that secure or represent your rights, everytime they don't work properly, you're unrepresented, your rights are unsecured....secession won't help the real problem one iota, it'll worsen it......get the Unification Science Upgrades (at http://www.PRLog.Org/10439874) or Repass the STILL-DUE 1776 Declaration of Independence (Article 18's "the benefit of trial by jury shall not be denied" is the FIRST U.S. COnstitution, still-due under the last articles of the 1777 Articles of Confederation and 1787 U.S. Constitution)...anything else can only worsen your problems by 3X+ GUARANTEED RCCFM: Always(c): Dr. Eric USRecovery@gmail.com http://www.JoinUSRecovery.Blogspot.com ("Free Legal Assistance") and http://www.Repass1776Declaration.Blogspot.com

    If you want to "Secede From Something", secede from the International Crime that's occupying your local grand jury and preventing the criminals in higher office from being tried and convicted for their crimes....no secession from the union required...in fact, it's the Union that gives you the right to do so......the "new one" won't, bank on it, otherwise, they would've already done it, as you paid them to do (their job as government employees) and you wouldn't have the problems you're having....that secession won't correct, it'll only worsen (3X+ worse, now proven, before it happens, with Unification Science)...RCCFM: Always(c): Dr. Eric USRecovery@Gmail.com Those wanting to secede aren't your friends or your government employees, beware..

    THE ONLY "COMPROMISE" THAT ISN'T U.S. SURRENDER/SUICIDE AT 3X+ THE RATE OF THIS PROPER FUNCTION....{As "Cuts" are thefts of already-paid-benefits-and premiums, multiplying real costs 3X+, and "tax hikes" are double jeopardy, convictionless inoluntary servitude and slavery, pretended authority legislations at 3X+ the real costs, THERE IS NO REAL ALTERNATIVE}
    {WITHOUT THE NEW UNIFICATION SCIENCE UPGRADES; OR THE RE-PASSAGE OF THE OLD/ORIGINAL 1776 DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, ONLY 3X+ THE CRIME AND DEBT EXPANSION CAN BE PRODUCED BY ANY "PRETENDED AUTHORITY LEGISLATION"...Like the original recording that "Digital/Chrome" captures, before repeated-plays/environmental-damage creates static/error that makes you miss what's said or think something else is said, everything else can only result in more preventable debt and crime increases, tripling the debt, instead of eliminating it, as doing so will accomplish, only doing so will accomplish}.

    It's the same problem we had with Reagan's administration.....the "Real Republicans" and the "Unreal Republicans" of post-WWII. The problem is, basically, an educational one (and reinforced by earlier "proper support and defense lapses" prior to WWII).....what isn't understood is that Social Security was based upon "1904-Relativity" and that anything truly-scientific is reprovable, meaning that "Support and Defense of the Constitution" REQUIRES "Support and Defense of the New Numbers" (Real Growth). IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME WITH THE UNIFICATION SCIENCE UPGRADES (the 1st of 9+ Upgrades the deficit cannot be eliminated without being at http://www.PRLog.Org/10439874). Just as failures to Support and Defend Social Security ("done right") can more readily be seen to be "Support and Defense of the Constitution" ("4+4=8"), so too "Support and Defense of Unification Science Upgrades" are Support and Defense of the Constitution, and opposition thereto is opposition to the Constitution (Pretended Authority acts that REPROVABLY can only expand crime and debt).....it's why the first order of business is to either get the Unification Science Upgrades implemented (so that you can know what the real numbers are, right now, instead of trying to legislate upon the bogus numbers of sabotage and dysfunction we have, or, otherwise, repass the STILL-DUE 1776 Declaration of Independence who's article 18 ""the benefit of trial by jury shall not be denied") makes the difference between "valid legislation" (crime and debt eliminating) and "pretended authority legislation" (crime and debt increasing) crystalline....the simplified definition of "what constitutes a government" from the founding fathers themselves....continuing to legislate upon "4+4=104" can only worsen the problems, now proven scientificlaly, by 3X+ the rate of this proper function.....http://www.Repass1776Declaration.Blogspot.com RCCFM: Always(c): Dr. Eric USRecovery@Gmail.com Everything else is the treasonable Legislation of the 1860s Civil War, done all over again...

    Anyhing else, everything else and you've been recruited by the same Intenational Crime Enemies that're stealing a trillion+ a year in interest alone from you now....RCCFM: Always(c): Dr. Eric USRecovery@Gmail.com

    [TWEEK YOUR BALLOTS TO "SECEDE FROM JURYLESS DETERMINATIONS/UNPRESENTED-RULINGS" AND INCLUDE SIGNATORIES AS "INACTIVE RESERVISTS/DEPUTIES" OF THE INDEPENDENT ESTABLISHMENT TO BE DUE COMPENSATION FOR THESE NEEDED EFFORTS]--FOR A CERTAIN LEGAL WIN {SUPERIOR TO A "CANNABIS CLUB CARD" FOR FULL-FLEDGED SECURITY OF YOUR RIGHTS/BENEFITS}!!!

  • Comment Link Ross Wolf Tuesday, 13 November 2012 18:09 posted by Ross Wolf

    Will Obama use NDAA To Arrest State Representatives and Citizens that support Secession?

    Could Obama use NDAA To Arrest Secessionists on the Premise members are Militants and Belligerents that pose a threat to National Security?

    Recently the Obama administration stated to Federal Judge Katherine Forest that under (NDAA) The National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 the President had authorization to lock up belligerents indefinitely. That they (were justified) to lock belligerents up indefinitely—because cases involving belligerents directly-aligned with militants against the good of America—warrants such punishment.) Pres. Obama could use NDAA provisions to order U.S. Military Forces to round up without evidence, millions of Americans including Secessionists and Militias by alleging they are belligerents or a threat to National Security. Many observers believe Obama intends to extend NDAA to imprison U.S. Citizens in Indefinite Detention not involved with or associated with enemy forces.

    Hitler included similar provisions in his fascist (Discriminatory Decrees signed February 28, 1933). Almost immediately after the German Parliament passed Hitler’s laws, the Reich Government ordered the arrest of German Citizens and confiscated their guns without probable cause or evidence; delegated powers to German Police and other authorities to arrest anyone Nazi authorities claimed attempted or incited public unrest: arrested among others were outspoken Germans, writers, journalists, peaceful protestors and artists. After World War II the East German Secret Police (Stasi) used the threat of Indefinite Detention to forcibly recruit thousands of informants.

    The U.S. 2012 NDAA legislation Obama signed 12-31-11 is similar to Hitler’s 1933 fascist laws the SS and Gestapo used to target persons in Germany for arrest, imprisonment and execution without probable cause; and confiscate millions of dollars of property. Hitler used his laws to suspend Parliament and the Supreme Court insuring his laws could not be rescinded.

    During the Obama Administration's recent request for a (stay) to stop U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest blocking enforcement of vague NDAA provisions, the Obama Administration—never clarified what constitutes a (belligerent); or militant; or what belligerent activities (directly aligned with a militant) to order a belligerent’s arrest or indefinite detention; or what is against the good of America. Under vague provisions of NDAA, the President could accuse anyone of being (directly aligned with militants by way of any political or other association; activity, statement, writing or communication with an individual or group government deemed (militant) to arrest and indefinitely detain Americans. Writers, journalists, Americans that disagree with or question U.S. Government or its allies—may under NDAA be subject to arrest and indefinite detention.

    NDAA 2012, like Hitler’s 1933 Discriminatory Decrees enforces censorship; refers to the Patriot Act e.g. warrant-less searches of private property and forfeiture of property from persons not charged with crime. Provisions in NDAA 2012 keep the door open for corrupt U.S. police; government agents and provocateurs which there are many, to falsify reports and statements to target any American, group or organization for arrest, indefinite detention, complete disappearance; civil asset forfeiture of their property.

    You may have noted NDAA referred to the USA Patriot Act. The Patriot Act lends itself to Government / police corruption; the Federal Government may use secret witnesses and informants to cause arrests and civil asset forfeiture of Americans’ property. Witness(s) and informants may be paid up to 50% of assets forfeited. Federal Government under 18USC may use a mere preponderance of civil evidence, little more than hearsay to Civilly Forfeit Private Property. Under the Patriot Act innocent property owners may be barred by government knowing the evidence federal government uses to forfeit their property.

    Sections of NDAA 2012 are so broad, it appears U.S. Government or the President could (retroactively) deem an American’s past 1st Amendment activities prior to passage of 2012 NDAA—supported hostilities, terrorism or (Belligerents) to order the arrest and Indefinite Detention of any U.S. Citizen, writer, group or organization.

    Under NDAA 2012 it should be expected that indefinitely detained U.S. Citizens not involved in terrorism or hostile activities, not given Miranda Warnings when interrogated, not allowed legal counsel or habeas corpus may be prosecuted for non-terrorist (ordinary crimes) because of their (alleged admissions) while held in Indefinite Detention.

  • Comment Link john Tuesday, 13 November 2012 17:34 posted by john

    Mr. Davis,
    Texas has a legitimate claim stated so above. I understand why they would want to secede, and maybe that is a good thing. The people who disagree with the government could move there, and that would give the rest of the US less to argue over. (not trying to stereotype)

  • Comment Link REMant Tuesday, 13 November 2012 17:20 posted by REMant

    While I can't speak to the wisdom of disunion, I think Mr Davis needs to cope with his ego.

  • Comment Link Daryl Davis Tuesday, 13 November 2012 17:02 posted by Daryl Davis

    It's understandable that conservatives should wish to secede from this failing Union. But the truth is that secession would not solve the demographic drift toward socialism, as each state would only become a miniature republic housing the same such constituencies.

    The answer is more likely to leave the nation intact, particularly with respect to our common defense. Instead, we ought to adopt a political system that, while still constitutional, would afford local communities the political freedom to determine the laws and ordinances that best reflect their unique values -- on abortion, gay marriage, legalized drugs -- while leaving other such communities to do the same.

    If the new constitution barred the transfer of debt from one state or community to another, and from one generation to another, all constituencies would be free to reap the rewards or the consequences of their respective ideologies. Then may the best one "win." Why relegate America to the ash heap of history by insisting that we all live according to one ideology or the other?

    Explore the alternatives:

    http://whatdirectdemocracymightbe.wordpress.com/in-brief/

Log in
Sign up for The New American daily highlights