25 states support Texas against Biden’s disregard of the constitution. It’s unlikely but ultimately could this be a spark that leads to a civil war?

[Kelley1]

When the US Supreme Court ruled that Federal authorities could remove razor wire that Texas Governor Greg Abbott had been installing along the border with Mexico to stop the millions of illegal immigrants from crossing over to the United States, Abbott did not back down. Instead, he issued a statement declaring that “an invasion under Article I, Section 10, Clause 3” of the US Constitution is underway and invoking “Texas’s constitutional authority to defend and protect itself.”

The intensity of the dispute became apparent when 25 Republican-led states issued statements in support of Texas. Moreover, Texas officials have refused to grant federal agents access to the border.

The situation continues to escalate because Democrats are demanding that Biden “take control” of the National Guard and turn it against the state government.

[DextroShade]

If there is a civil war I hope all the woke people die in it along with the invaders.

[gorydetails]

I'm glad my state is supporting texas. FJB.

[ImHere22]

Your state’s leadership are idiots then

[Kelley1]

@ImHere22 Of course you don’t want a civil war. Obviously, you are smart enough to know that in a civil war, you liberals would lose and it would be no contest. The Republicans have the guns and the knowledge and willingness to use them when it involved protecting them and theirs. The Democrats, full of simps, gays, and trans would be running, hiding, and calling 911. And, the police in liberal areas would run too when the guns were not heavily in their favor.

[gorydetails]

@ImHere22 Because they don’t support an invasion of illegals? I’m ok with that.

[Anonymous]

Meanwhile, Texas is a glowing example of what? Nothing. Abbott is one of the biggest violators of Constitutional and State laws in his own state ever.

As to a Civil War - no need. All of your red states that rely on the economy of the blue states can leave. Go, good-bye, good riddance. Take with you the least educated people, the highest incarcerations, the most crime per capita, the highest maternal and child death rates, the most poverty. PLEASE... GO!!

Start your own country and call it Gilead. Suppress your people and impose your religious bullshit on them. Really. There's no need for a war. The rest of the USA will be glad to see you leave.

[Kelley1]

That is exactly what they want to do but you liberals are preventing it.

[Opinion Owner]

"They", the people in the red states, don't want to secede because even THEY know who's paying to keep them afloat. Some think it won't matter, but they're so wrong. It's mainly a few idiot politicians who somehow think they can make up that Federal money out of nowhere. They would destroy their state's economy even further in a matter of months.

Personally, I'd love to see those ass hats secede, but not without some kind of relocation system set up for those who want out, and those who want in. "Liberals" (lol, a funny, undefined term for any conservative) are not fully in favor of that either, much to my dismay.

[Opinion Owner]

You don't seem to realize that "USA Red" or whatever new country they'd be, would likely not allow travel through their states, or maybe even tourism to their states, by people from the original USA. Imagine if no one but Reds could go to Disney World and they shut down due to lack of patronage. Florida would die. What about professional sports? That would be a mess as well.

Yeah, as much as I'd like them to go away, and stop taking all the revenue sharing (uh, welfare - to those of you in red states who say "we are not a welfare state"), it's not going to happen.

[abc3643]

No.

First off, regardless of what states support what, Article VI contains the Supremacy Clause which states that the federal government laws and activities are above any state or local laws.

Any state that thwarts that is, in my opinion, is in rebellion.
They stop existing that afternoon.

[WindAtMyBack]

If you assume that Article 6 even applies, then it REQUIRES Texas to do what they are doing.

[abc3643]

@WindAtMyBack
My instinct is to say, "No, what you say is false." however I am willing to let you explain your reasoning. In include the Supremacy Clause in my discussion below.

Meanwhile, no part of the US Constitution "does not apply".
============

I empathize with the immigration and border security problem that not just Texas but all states have. In particular, Texas, of course, because they are a significant fraction of the border.

However, Texas's installation of razor wire is one thing.
Immediately, it would be unconstitutional because Texas isn't responsible for its own foreign policy nor can dictate US foreign policy. Furthermore, Texas is not responsible for immigration.
This is all laid-out under Article I, mostly in Sections 8 and 10.

But, putting that aside for a moment, Texas is pissy because Federal border agents have cut or removed razor wire that Texas put up. The Federal border agents have jobs to do under US law. That means Texas cannot obstruct in any way what those agents are allowed or required to do under federal law. That's what the Supremacy Clause is about.

As a refresher, this is the Supremacy Clause:
"
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
"
(more)

[abc3643]

What Texas and the other border states should do is go into Federal District Court and sue the United States to enforce Article IV Section 4:

"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."

The problem with that is that the legal definition of invasion isn't really satisfied by the people crossing the border "illegally". And this is why these states have likely not sued in Federal District Court; they summarily lose, so it's a waste of time and money.

[WindAtMyBack]

"I am willing to let you explain your reasoning"

Article 6 basically says that federal laws extend to the states. The people illegally crossing the border are by definition illegal. Therefore the states MUST enforce the law. To look the other way would be in violation of Article 6.

"no part of the US Constitution "does not apply"

That includes the 10th amendment. The feds have NO power unless they are explicitly given that power by the Constitution.

The feds only have supremacy in limited narrow areas. In everything else they have no authority at all. So anything and everything that is not explicit in the Constitution "does not apply".

[Kelley1]

@WindAtMyBack You are telling it like it is.

[abc3643]

@WindAtMyBack no Article 6 says the laws of the United States are supreme and override any state laws. It's a very important article because that is the big difference between the Articles of Confederation and our government under the Constitution.

[Anonymous]

Why would there be a civil war over not following the Constitution?

The Constitution has built in provisions for changing it, and it has been changed several times throughout American history.

If no one has proposed a change to the Constitution, and no one has wrongfully denied that change, what reason would there be to have a war over it?

Either change it through the lawful process, or follow it. Disregarding it is a crime, and war based on that is a war crime.

I wish people studied and understood history the way they used to. Oh, but that would mean teacher's unions having to actually allow teachers to teach.

[Kelley1]

This will not start a civil war. However, it could be a spark that starts a fire. That is, the butterfly effect that rests on the notion that the world is deeply interconnected, such that one small occurrence can influence a much larger complex system.

[normalice]

I understand foreign dictatorships are really crossing their fingers hoping for a civil war but really all the bluster from the right is to distract everyone from the fact that the right openly admitted they aren't actually going to fix the problem, because they don't want to lose it as a campaign talking point.

[DryGermanGuy]

Enough with the silly civil war babble already! The GOP has it in their hands to agree to the completed border security bill, which ads 14 billion dollars to border patrol, ICE and immigration judges. The Senate GOP has agreed already, but the destructive MAGA clowns in the House want to do Trump's bidding, instead of working for the American people.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Guaq-n4VCoA

[Avicenna]

Yeah, sure, Democrats care SO much about the American people that they've let in millions of people whose identities are completely unknown. Democrats won't enforce the ample existing laws on border security, so why would anyone believe they'd enforce any new laws that allegedly provide border security? Only a fool or a liar would.

[DryGermanGuy]

Immigration has been a problem for the last two, maybe three generations and no party so far has been exactly successful with their ideas. If you think the problem lies solely with the democrats, you are terribly misinformed. Reagan, Bush sen, Bush jun and Trump had all the same problems. According to federal data the year with the most illegal entries was 2017 under Trump. Also both Obama and Biden had years with more illegal immigrants removed than Trump. Trump also mouthed off about "building a wall and having Mexico pay for it". So, where is it?

[ImHere22]

Just so we’re clear: Texas as a people don’t support the stupid GOP leadership here. Texas as a government is quite the opposite- Abbott is actively trying to have a Civil War II, but that is not a view shared by most Texans.

[Avicenna]

Well, Joe Biden and plenty of other Democrats are salivating at the idea of committing mass murder of their political opponents, but a civil war is not in the offing. The real fault lines in US politics aren't inherently regional, either.

[Anonymous]

if it does, then it does. may the best man win. god only helps those who help themselves

[Dargil]

Biden will back down. This is so bad for him that he can ruin Mike Obama's Presidential chances.

[nawtee_me]

Before a civil war starts the terrorist already here from crossing the border will take us out when we bomb Iran. Was is coming very soon but it won’t be a civil war….

[Zestyassmf1997]

Statements of support art kinda meaningless. Actions are what count.

[Anonymous]

I hope the Dems don't vote for another Chinese puppet next time.

[jimmy2]

This plus if they cheat again
It's could top off with this weekend at that field

[Anonymous]

Biden's a dumbass!

[jahaims]

Nah.