Courtesy Texas Nationalist Movement
(Editor’s Note: While this ruling helps in the “Cover Your Ass” Department, no legal argument needs to be made. The US Constitution has no force of law in this matter. Even if you think that it does, then the Tenth Amendment is your saving grace. A state that asserts its sovereignty and secedes from the United States ceases to be subject to Federal law, and a new nation shouldn’t concern itself with the machinations of the International Court of World Justice in The Hague. The men who led the 1776 secession in America offered their reasons for secession to “a candid world” in the Declaration of Independence, and only sought the protection of Divine Providence.)
Thursday’s ruling by the International Court of Justice in The Hague on whether the 2008 secession from Serbia by Kosovo violated international law takes a bite out of statists’ arguments against secession by Texas, Texas Nationalist Movement president Daniel Miller said.
“The recent opinion of the ICJ regarding the independence of Kosovo has tremendous meaning for Texas, Miller said Thursday. “While we decry the erosion of sovereignty to international bodies, the fact is that the United States government has systematically taken away the sovereignty of Texas and passed it along to international institutions which, by and large, do not represent the values of Texans.”
The world court ruled that Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence from Serbia did not violate international law. As read by ICJ President Hisashi Owada, international law contains “no prohibition on declarations of independence.”
Because the U.S. government, under both Republican and Democratic administrations, has supported both the secession of Kosovo and rulings by the World Court, Miller said, it could not morally continue to insist that secession from the United States is “illegal” and would not be justified in using military force to prevent Texas secession.
“The United States and other European nations have acknowledged the right of unilateral secession of any state, thereby making any violent opposition to a seceding state unsustainable and unjustified,” Miller said.
He added that the court’s ruling merely reaffirms what TNM and other movements have maintained for years.
“As the ICJ has ruled that unilateral secession is not a violation of international law, the next lawful authority is the US Constitution. As the US Constitution is silent on the matter, the 10th Amendment in the Bill of Rights is supreme which states: ‘The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.’ This places the lawfulness of a unilateral secession of Texas in the hands of Texans,” he said.
“The current Constitution of Texas, Article 1, Section 1 of the Texas Bill of Rights states: ‘…the maintenance of our free institutions and the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the preservation of the right of local self-government.’ It goes on further to say in Article 1, Section 2: ‘The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.’
“The bottom line is that the unilateral secession of Texas is lawful on a State, Federal and International level,” Miller said.
Miller said it was important, however, to recognize the stark differences between the Kosovo independence movement – a movement primarily ethnic in nature – and the Texas independence movement, which cuts across ethnicities and is instead political, cultural and economic. In fact, given the U.S. government’s failure to perform its constitutional duties in preventing foreign invasion, it becomes imperative for Texas to secede in order to prevent secession along ethnic lines.
“This is a cautionary tale for Texans. The independence of Kosovo occurred as an ethnic secession,” Miller said. “The ICJ ruling indicates that at any time, a majority of the people can rise up and declare their independence.
“While the Texas Nationalist Movement is encouraged by this ruling, we also recognize the fact that groups who adhere to the political goal of Reconquista are emboldened by it as well,” he added. “This ruling, when coupled with the decline of the American Union, bolsters our position that the independence of Texas is an inevitability. With the United States Federal Government actively engaged in denying Texas the right to protect our own borders, we are locked in a race with the Reconquista movement to secure the independence of Texas.”
Miller said the TNM is committed to continuing to work through elected officials to establish an independent republic where the unique culture, political and economic institutions of Texas are preserved.
“Texans must gain their independence now,” he said. “It is moral, lawful and imperative if we ever hope to protect our freedom, our system of government and our national interests.”