Scalia - States have no right to secede

[erowe1]

http://www.newyorkpersonalinjuryatto...to-secede.html

Dan is a screenwriter (whose screenplay Tranquility Base was just named a finalist at the Vail Film Festival, and previously took top honors elsewhere). Back in 2006 he started working on a political farce that had Maine seceding from the United States and joining Canada.

Bro was well ahead of the tea partiers in contemplating impending problems as we racked up massive debt. This doesn't get him an agent or a foot in the door of Hollywood to get his screenplays made into films -- it isn't what you write, but who you know -- but it does make him a prophet of sorts.

So, on a lark, he wrote to each of the 10 Supreme Court justices (including O'Connor) with this request:

I'm a screenwriter in New York City, and am writing to see if you might be willing to assist me in a project that involves a unique constitutional issue.

My latest screenplay is a comedy about Maine seceding from the United States and joining Canada. There are parts of the story that deal with the legality of such an event and, of course, a big showdown in the Supreme Court is part of the story.

At the moment my story is a 12 page treatment. As an architect turned screenwriter, it is fair to say that I come up a bit short in the art of Supreme Court advocacy. If you could spare a few moments on a serious subject that is treated in a comedic way, I would greatly appreciate your thoughts. I'm sure you'll find the story very entertaining.


I told Dan he was nuts. I told him his letter would be placed in the circular file. And then Scalia wrote back. Personally. Explicitly rejecting the right to secede:

I am afraid I cannot be of much help with your problem, principally because I cannot imagine that such a question could ever reach the Supreme Court. To begin with, the answer is clear. If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede. (Hence, in the Pledge of Allegiance, "one Nation, indivisible.") Secondly, I find it difficult to envision who the parties to this lawsuit might be. Is the State suing the United States for a declaratory judgment? But the United States cannot be sued without its consent, and it has not consented to this sort of suit.

I am sure that poetic license can overcome all that -- but you do not need legal advice for that. Good luck with your screenplay.

Add this to your reasons why Clarence Thomas is better than Scalia.

[FrankRep]

YouTube - Interposition, Nullification and Secession on Freedom Watch - Judge talks to Lew Rockwell

[LittleLightShining]

He did not really cite the pledge of allegiance.

[Bruno]

He did not really cite the pledge of allegiance.

A pledge made up by a socialist trumps the Constitution. We all know that.

[fisharmor]

Seriously?
Is English really that difficult to grasp?
How can he go so far out on a limb and state that there was actually a constitutional question and that it got answered?
The only question that got answered was "can we resist federal tyranny this decade" and the answer was "no, and boy howdy do we have plans for what to do when we get done here!"

[jmdrake]

http://www.newyorkpersonalinjuryatto...to-secede.html


Add this to your reasons why Clarence Thomas is better than Scalia.

Has Clarence Thomas endorsed a right to secession or is that wishful thinking?

[erowe1]

Has Clarence Thomas endorsed a right to secession or is that wishful thinking?

Wishful thinking. I don't actually know if he might well answer this the same way as Scalia. But in this case, I can say I know Scalia got it wrong, while there's at least still a chance that Thomas wouldn't.

My general preference to Thomas over Scalia is based on other things.

[dannno]

He did not really cite the pledge of allegiance.

Apparently it is more important than the Constitution.

[cjm]

The constitutional question that was posed by the 1861 secession was this: "is the Union ruled by law, or is it ruled by men?" And the answer, as Justice Scalia implied, is that the Union is ruled by men, and those men do not approve of secession.

[Toureg89]

I do like Scalia and Thomas, mostly because they are the most libertarian justices, which isnt hard to get when you have a bunch of "living" constitutionalists on the Court.

that being said, we COULD HAVE a lot better judges, if we could get them through the approval process.