- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Ramifications of California Splitting Into 3 States?
Posted on 6/13/18 at 12:50 pm to AUCE05
Posted on 6/13/18 at 12:50 pm to AUCE05
quote:
It won't happen. Even if 100% of the voting Californians approve the split, the feds have the final say. The last tine it happened was Virginia splitting, and that took a civil war.
Pretty sure Malcolm Gladwell did a podcast on this recently that was focused around some internal Texas strife. I didn't listen too closely and tuned a bit of it out, but it somehow has to do with ambiguities in the constitution's grammar. Supposedly it could be interpreted that Federal consent is only required to add a new state, but that it's not required to split existing states. Supposedly that could be interpreted to be determinable at the state level.
Do I believe that would ever hold-up in court? God no, but it would be interesting to see how things would shake up if either Texas or California split (in some crazy hypothetical realty).
3
Posted on 6/13/18 at 12:51 pm to Hot Carl
I would think only the voters in what would be new states could vote on it?
Posted on 6/13/18 at 1:13 pm to chalmetteowl
Please let this go through so we can be free of NorCal and Cal
Posted on 6/13/18 at 1:17 pm to FootballNostradamus
quote:
Supposedly it could be interpreted that Federal consent is only required to add a new state, but that it's not required to split existing states. Supposedly that could be interpreted to be determinable at the state level.
I"m not trying to be a dick here as I realize you are just relaying relaying an argument Gladwell made and not endorsing it, but that's the silliest goddamn argument I've heard all week and would result in the shortest SCOTUS opinion in the history of the Court.
Something like:
Question Presented: is splitting a State in two the same as adding a State?
Held: Yes it is.
Posted on 6/13/18 at 2:00 pm to Buckeye Backer
Just a bunch of Trumpsters who are too dumb to realize that all you’re gonna to get is 3 “liberal” states... not going to happen.
This post was edited on 6/13/18 at 2:01 pm
Posted on 6/13/18 at 2:01 pm to RyleD
quote:
Just a bunch of Trumpsters who are too dumb to realize that all you’re gonna to get is 3 “liberal” states... not going to happen.
Are you serious baw?
Posted on 6/13/18 at 2:11 pm to Rayburn8
quote:
Can’t Texas split into 5 states anytime they want to?
Kinda sorta.
Posted on 6/13/18 at 2:14 pm to Buckeye Backer
quote:
Something has to give in California. Its unsustainable. I am all for it.
Posted on 6/13/18 at 2:16 pm to Buckeye Backer
Nor Cal would be the richest new state.
So Cal would be the poorest new state.
California would get all the tourists.
Posted on 6/13/18 at 2:21 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:
California would get all the tourists.
I imagine Disneyland being in Southern Cal would even it out
Posted on 6/13/18 at 2:35 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:
So Cal would be the poorest new state.
California would get all the tourists.
Posted on 6/13/18 at 2:38 pm to Buckeye Backer
quote:
Now now if there was a state called Western Carolina and Western Carolina was still in North Carolina....don’t u think that’d be weird???
kind of like Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Posted on 6/13/18 at 2:40 pm to FootballNostradamus
quote:
Supposedly it could be interpreted that Federal consent is only required to add a new state, but that it's not required to split existing states.
Article IV of the Constitution addresses this specifically.
quote:
New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
Posted on 6/13/18 at 2:46 pm to RyleD
They don’t like California, they should leave right?
Posted on 6/13/18 at 2:47 pm to FootballNostradamus
quote:
Supposedly it could be interpreted that Federal consent is only required to add a new state, but that it's not required to split existing states. Supposedly that could be interpreted to be determinable at the state level.
Not a lawyer but I don't see how it could be interpreted that you wouldn't need Congressional approval. It seems the last six words make it pretty clear.
Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1-
New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
Posted on 6/13/18 at 3:58 pm to SDVTiger
Have you been to the Central Valley?
Shite-kicker towns that nobody wants to go to but migrant workers.
Crime is the biggest in the State in the Central Valley.
Nor Cal has Silicon Valley, San Jose and S.F. Tech.
California would have all the coastal cities that people love.
Monterey, Pebble Beach, Santa Barbara, San Louis, Big Sur...all the scenic stuff and Hollywood and most of all the beaches of L.A....Lakers, NFL, Dodgers.
All So Cal would have is Anaheim and Disneyland and dry dusty waterless Central Valley cities that nobody goes to...raise cattle.
This post was edited on 6/13/18 at 4:01 pm
Posted on 6/13/18 at 4:05 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Yeah i live here and what bunch of nonsense you just posted
Posted on 6/13/18 at 4:12 pm to Buckeye Backer
quote:
California is set to vote on splitting the state into 3 separate states....California, Northern California and Southern California. That got me thinking, how would that impact current California Universities naming? For example...California would be located in the new "Northern California". USC would be located in "California" and not in the new "Southern California". The satellite campuses of California would be a mess. For example...UC Riverside would reside in "Southern California" Would it then become Southern California Riverside? Because of new governments and I'm assuming funding issues, would all of these schools be forced to rename their universities?
I can honestly say, I don't give a shite and would never have started a post about it.
Posted on 6/13/18 at 4:47 pm to Buckeye Backer
I don’t think anyone has to worry about any of this. People in California are much too stupid to to consider logistics before drastic action.
This post was edited on 6/13/18 at 4:49 pm
Posted on 6/13/18 at 5:49 pm to Buckeye Backer
Name is least of it.
Dividing the retirements is the challenge.
A lot of overhead at first.
The sf sacto is the winner.
Common sense will have to prevail. Kid in jc in socal wanted to transfer to uc Berkeley. Now he's out of state.
Dividing the retirements is the challenge.
A lot of overhead at first.
The sf sacto is the winner.
Common sense will have to prevail. Kid in jc in socal wanted to transfer to uc Berkeley. Now he's out of state.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News