Today I posit a simple question in response to a tweet @DruckerPhilip I sent regarding the EPA’s decision to revoke California’s right to set its own automobile emissions standards.

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/18/761815991/white-house-to-revoke-waiver-allowing-california-to-set-its-own-emissions-standa

“Pacifica Now!” The words referring to the nascent but growing idea of California, Washington and Oregon forming their own independent Pacific Coast nation, Pacifica.

http://www.nationofpacifica.com/

Throw in the western side of British Columbia, and you have Cascadia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascadia_(independence_movement)

“Good. When are you going?” was the basic response.

I started to wonder. When are we going to go? Then I saw this.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/greggardner/2019/07/25/ford-honda-volkswagen-and-bmw-strike-climate-deal-with-california-defying-trump/?fbclid=IwAR0jat4kdOciE85YsRpNmKo8D5vdQ00Sjovh3NhaaQj3-1nTXzKyf2VDXDU#15b17dd22033

California made a deal with 1/3rd of the auto industry to abide by California emissions standards. Isn’t that what sovereigns do? Make deals with “foreign” manufacturers? Then I smiled. It has begun. Now my question has morphed to when is a secession not a secession, but a fait accompli? Since that time,13 more states have pledged to follow California’s lead. Who’s wagging the dog now, tail?

The US Constitution is eerily silent on the issue of State secession. Most likely because if several of the states (mostly southern) were not led to believe they could leave at will, they would not have ratified the Constitution, and left.

Right about now you are probably about to ask, what about that Civil War? How did Lincoln do it? He pulled a fast one. Lincoln relied on the Preamble for the basis of his supposed constitutional power in defiance of State secession. He relied on “a more perfect Union.” Lincoln posited he, as part of his presidential power and authority was therefore constitutionally tasked with perfecting, or at least preserving the Union, with whatever means he felt necessary. Including war.

Considering the US Civil War ended in 1865, it is a bit odd that it wasn’t until 1869 that our Supreme Court finally put in their by then, unnecessary two-cents worth. In Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700, the Court indicated a sort of no-fault, mutuality of agreement between the State and Federal government before parting ways. Without further guidance, it would appear irreconcilable differences as a reason will do.

Adding a bit more fuel to the Molotov cocktail, or in California’s case, probably a flammable Pina Colada in a reusable container, the Eureka State is a referendum state, meaning it can have a vote for secession put directly on the ballot by voter’s initiative. That would leave, probably Congress to add their mutual consent whether to keep the world’s 5th largest economy and largest state contributor to the federal tax coffers.

But as I suggested earlier, there is more than one way to secede a cat. The Federal government has three branches. No more will the land of milk and honey fear or follow the dictates of the Executive branch. The orange skinned oaf has met his match. Next, could it be possible California refuses to honor a ruling from the Supreme Court? Perhaps refusing to trade with any state not willing to offer its women at least their natural, common law rights to an abortion prior to the quickening? That would leave only the laws of Congress left to disavow, discard and replace. Done. Without a single shot fired. Brexit is foolish. This is not. Pacifica Now!

Do you want to know more?
@DruckerPhilip
www.druckerreport.com(Weathervane Blog)