Do states have a right to secede from the union? The issue is generating some
debate on blogs after Texas Gov. Rick Perry told a "tea party" rally
that Texans could get so fed up with big government that they may some day seek
that option.
It turns out that Justice Antonin Scalia has weighed in with his views, in a
letter to a legal blogger’s screenwriting brother. Scalia tackled the
constitutional question (there is no right to secede, he says) as well as the
possibility of a Supreme Court showdown over the issue (don’t count on it).
The screenwriter was working on a political farce in 2006 about Maine
seceding from the United States, and he envisioned a Supreme Court showdown.
Justice Scalia didn’t side with Maine.
“I cannot imagine that such a question could ever reach the Supreme
Court,” Scalia wrote. “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. … 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.”
Scalia goes on to say he is sure that “poetic license” can overcome the
legal issues.

The
right of a state to secede from the nation is way outside my personal injury
wheelhouse. But it has become a source of conversation on professorial and
political blogs, and the concept has generated interest from the Tea Party
movement.
As it happens, my brother has a letter from
Justice
Antonin Scalia that is
directly on point as to the legitimacy of secession. How he got that letter,
and its contents, are the subject of today's post.
The inspiration for writing, and the release of the letter, comes from
Prof.
Eugene Volokh, who wrote, "I keep hearing the claim that the
legitimacy of secession from the U.S. was 'settled at Appomattox,' and I
wanted to say a few words about why I think that makes little sense."
The good prof goes on to write that, while clearly not supporting secession of
any State in concept, that the issue is far from settled. He writes:
If in 2065 Alaska, California, Hawaii, or Texas (just to consider some
examples) assert a right to secede, the argument that "in 1865, the
victorious Union government concluded that no state has a right to secede in
opposition to the wishes of the Union, so therefore you lack such a
right" will have precisely the weight that the Americans of 2065 will
choose to give it -- which should be very little.
Thus far, that post has generated 152 comments.
Well prof, Justice Scalia disagrees with you. Explicitly. Why did he do so in
a letter to my brother? Glad you asked.
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.
So there you have it. At least one vote solidly on record as saying that there
is no right to secede. And it likely comes from a place the right wing
secessionists most wanted to have a vote.
And yes, Dan still needs an agent. Because writing great scripts isn't enough
if you don't know The Powers That Be on the other coast. And, for what it's
worth, his now-completed script of Maine joining Canada is better than his
award-winning one about a mis-adventure in space.