※ 引述《t20056 (吳先生)》之銘言：
: 美國現在有些人反對川普政權。
: 萬一有州主張脫離川普的統治，要求脫離聯邦獨立。
: 川普會派坦克以及特種部隊去鎮壓州獨立運動人士嗎?
: 川普會不會派坦克機槍掃射鎮壓白宮廣場前遊行的民眾呢?
: 美國聯邦當局真的不在意有人脫離聯邦獨立嗎?
川普現在掌聯邦大權
一定會派兵弭平東西各州的獨立叛亂
東西各州想獨立 想的美咧
就算打第二次南北戰爭 川普也不會讓這些州輕易獨立
而且這次內部戰爭 不再是 北 vs.南 這麼單純好分
而是 東+西 vs. 中+南(支持川普的州)
就法律層面來講
美國最高法院認為 沒有任何一個州有權單方面決定離開聯邦
東州,西州 若想獨立 必定會被冠上非法叛亂的罪名
然後受到掌聯邦大權的川普 無情的鎮壓
見這段 脫離聯邦
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._state#Secession_from_the_Union
The Constitution is silent on the issue of the secession of a state from
the union.
However, its predecessor document, the Articles of Confederation, stated
that the United States "shall be perpetual.
這邊講的是 美國憲法本身對脫離聯邦這問題是靜默的
然而美國憲法的前身 邦聯條例 Articles of Confederation 卻有寫明
美國是永久的
" The question of whether or not individual states held the right to
unilateral secession remained a difficult and divisive one until the
American Civil War.
In 1860 and 1861, eleven southern states seceded, but following their defeat
in the American Civil War were brought back into the Union during the
Reconstruction Era.
The federal government never recognized the secession of any of the
rebellious states.
這段講到在南北戰爭之前
個別州是否單分面有權決定脫離聯邦 美國內部人人說法不一 存有分歧
但在發生南北戰爭 11州片面決定脫離離邦 被擊敗並被帶回來聯邦 這事情時
聯邦政府在那時 就從來沒有承認任何反叛州 有權單方面決定脫離聯邦
Following the Civil War, the United States Supreme Court,
in Texas v. White, held that states did not have the right to secede
and that any act of secession was legally void.
Drawing on the Preamble to the Constitution, which states that the
Constitution was intended to "form a more perfect union" and speaks
of the people of the United States in effect as a single body politic,
as well as the language of the Articles of Confederation, the Supreme
Court maintained that states did not have a right to secede.
However, the court's reference in the same decision to the possibility
of such changes occurring "through revolution, or through consent of
the States," essentially means that this decision holds that no state
has a right to unilaterally decide to leave the Union.
這段在講 南北戰爭後 美國最高法院在 德克薩斯州訴懷特案 中明確表示
個別州無權單方面決定脫離聯邦 而且 任何試圖脫離的行動 都在法律上無效
最高法院 依據美國憲法序言 各州形成更完美的聯盟
以及根據憲法的前身 邦聯條例 美國是永久的
用上面這兩項作出判決結論 美國各州無權單方面決定脫離聯邦
但最高法院也有在此判決中同樣的提到
透過革命方式 或透過全部州集合開會議一致決定方式 仍可以讓一個州單獨退出聯邦
順便提到德克薩斯州獨立的問題
當初德州是以德克薩斯共和國的身份 加入聯邦
很多人會誤以為 他有權單方面決定再以德克薩斯共和國的身份 脫離聯邦
這其實是錯的
理由如同上面講的 美國最高法院的判決: 美國各州無權單方面決定脫離聯邦
關於德州現在擁有的權利
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090312100909AASNKHy
"The Truth About Texas" by Anne Dingus (IHNW, IJLS "Anne Dingus")
ISBN 0-87719-282-0.
Texas does not have the right to secede, any more than any other state does.
Which is not to say that Texas, or any other state, can't secede if it has a
mind to; after all, 11 states did back in 1861.
Many modern Texans have the vague idea - as did most secessionists - that
because Texas entered as a former republic, it retained the right to leave
the Union if it saw fit.
However, no such clause appears in the congressional act authorizing Texas
to join the Union.
一樣講 德州無權單方面決定脫離聯邦
現代德州人 大多數德州分離主義者 認為德州當初以一個國家 加入聯邦
就能再以一個國家 脫離聯邦
然而 這種說法 在當初德克薩斯共和國議會 授權併入聯邦條款中 並沒有出現
One privelege Texas does reserve, and a condition that appears in the
resolution approving its statehood, is the option to subdivide itself into as
many as four states (a total of five).
比較特別的是有提到一項
德州 當初在德克薩斯共和國時期 的一項專業特權被保留
就是 德州議會仍保留有選擇權 作出決議 把德州裂解分出4小州 然後繼續待在聯邦
美國最高法院 相當於其他國家的憲法法庭的地位
其決議跟判決不容挑戰