Texas Republican Party recently reasserted a popular plank in its platform concerning Texas’ sovereignty and right to secede from the United States, also known as “TEXIT” fashioned after the recent British move from the European Union known as “BREXIT”. The pro TEXIT organization the Texas Nationalist Movement, headed by President Daniel Miller, wielded increasing influence at the recent Texas GOP convention easily reaffirming the right to secede in the Texas GOP plank.
In late 2023, Texas Nationalists delivered 140,000+ voter petition signatures to the outgoing Texas GOP Chair Matt Rinaldi which would have required a referendum on Texas independence to be placed on the GOP primary ballot. The Texas GOP establishment, fearing blowback on the Republicans nationally, succeeded on having the ballots invalidated in several court cases on minor technicalities. The establishment Republicans in Texas simply do not believe Texans maintain the God-given right of self-determination – unless you live in Ukraine.
During the Texas GOP convention, party members overwhelmingly backed the platform plank insisting on Texas’ sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment and reaffirming the state’s right to secede. Historically, Texas has championed a strong stance on states’ rights, drawing from its unique history as an independent republic before joining the Union in 1845. The Tenth Amendment, which reserves unspecified powers to the states or the people, serves as a cornerstone for this argument. This reaffirmation comes amid growing political polarization and has stirred both fervent support and intense criticism across the nation.
The concept of secession has deep roots in Texas history and in Texans’ individual psyche. After declaring independence from Mexico and achieving it finally in the Battle of San Jacinto in 1836, Texas functioned as a sovereign nation until its annexation. This independent streak is significant, as Texas is the only U.S. state that was once a standalone republic. Yet, the Supreme Court’s 1869 highly-skeptical ruling in Texas v. White provides anti-secessionists with a fallible argument states cannot secede, despite the rich history of the colonies doing exactly the same thing from England.
Supporters within the GOP, particularly those aligned with the party’s more conservative factions, view it as a legitimate expression of state rights and autonomy. They argue that increasing federal overreach justifies the need for a stance on secession. Conversely, critics within the party and beyond decry the move as anachronistic and divisive, cautioning that it could undermine national unity and democracy. Polling data reveals a complex picture. According to a University of Texas/Texas Tribune Poll, a notable minority of Texans support the idea of exploring secession, reflecting broader dissatisfaction with the federal government.
The discussion of secession for some brings to mind historical parallels to the Civil War, when secessionist movements led to conflict and division. Today, the implications of secession are vastly more complex. Economically, Texas, a significant contributor to the national GDP, would face significant – but not impossible challenges in establishing a self-sufficient economy while disentangling from federal systems and regulations.
Furthermore, the geopolitical consequences would be profound. Texas’ secession could inspire other movements within the state or across other states, potentially destabilizing the Union. National security concerns would also emerge, given Texas’ strategic military bases and economic assets.
As Texas Republicans reaffirm this contentious platform plank, the political conversation regarding state sovereignty and federal power intensifies. The debate taps into a rich historical narrative while posing significant legal, economic, and social questions for the future.
For now, the plank remains largely symbolic, lacking the legal framework for actual secession as the le
Ultimately, whether used as a rallying cry for political autonomy or a cautionary tale of division, the reaffirmation of Texas’ right to secede underscores the complexities entangled in the pursuit of sovereignty in the modern era.
