Sorry to inject a bit of levity, but I wonder how many people on the
list feel about Texas the way the French diplomat thought about Germany:
I love it so much I want there to be two (or more) of it.  Depends on
the gerrymandering of the division, I suppose.  Pity if all those
electoral votes were divided up.

John T. Parry
Assistant Professor of Law
University of Pittsburgh School of Law
3900 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15260
412-648-7006


-----Original Message-----
From: Keith E. Whittington [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 9:18 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Texas Pledge of Allegiance

Despite Chase's thundering, I notice that the "Citizen Handbook" on the
Texas State Senate page explains that "Texas remained a state until 1861
when it seceded from the Union . . [and] was readmitted to the United
States in 1870.

On the division question, apparently the Reconstruction federal
Congress, state constitutional convention, and state legislature
discussed dividing Texas several times (including one plan to create a
new state of "Lincoln" in west Texas.  If West Texas voters were more
likely to be Republican [and I don't know if that's true], then this
would be in keeping with the Reconstruction-era Republican strategy of
creating thinly populated but reliably Republican states in the West to
protect the Senate and the presidency).  The possibility of division was
discussed again in the early twentieth century (when West Texas grew in
population) and was last seriously advocated by John Nance Garner in the
early 1930s (perhaps to enhance his presidential prospects?  Has Karl
Rove heard about this!!).  The "one and indivisible" language in the
pledge was adopted in 1933 (it also now appears on the reverse of the
state seal).  The division info. from the Handbook of Texas online.  I
would tak!
 e the pledge to be a reaction to Garner's plan and an expression of the
commitment of Texans at the time to preserve Texas a single state
(though I haven't seen a direct discussion of the origins of the
pledge).

Keith Whittington

-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for con law professors
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Levinson
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 11:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Texas Pledge of Allegiance


I know of no evidence that Texas was required to waive its special deal
(though my lack of knowledge is not dispositive evidence that evidence
doesn't exist).  Furthermore, it is quite misleading to speak of Texas
"re-entering" the Union, since, as Justice Chase thundered in Texas v.
White, the Union was "indissoluble" and, therefore, Texas was never out
of the Union.  This is obviously a disputed proposition, but no US
official has ever conceded the legal reality of secession.

sandy

-----Original Message-----
From: "Eastman, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 16:44:33 -0700
Subject: Re: Texas Pledge of Allegiance

Forgive me if my recollection is inaccurate, but did not Texas waive its
"split" option as a condition of re-entering the union following the
Civil War?  If so, this option did not perish over time, but was
cancelled.


John C. Eastman
Professor of Law, Chapman University School of Law
Director, The Claremont Institute Center for Constitutional
Jurisprudence


-----Original Message-----
From: Levinson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 4:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Texas Pledge of Allegiance


Bryan writes:

Finally, it is silly to refer to Texas as "indivisible" when the 1845
statehood act expressly gives Texas the option of splitting into five
states.


So we have an interesting meta-issue.  Is the sponsor of this new pledge
conceding that the original legislation containing the option was either
unconstitutional or has perished over time, or could one legitimately
argue today that Texas has an option to split into five states (with ten
senators) without any congressional approval?  If the latter is true,
then the pledge states a false theory, for Texas is indivisible only so
long as Texans wish it to remain that way.

sandy

sandy

Reply via email to