(After reading this, does anybody still think the Chuuk Status Commission is nuts?? One of the most progressive states in the US opting for Secession because of an intolerable Union or Federation!! You just got to love Chuuk and California even without the Golden State Warriors!)

Advocates who want California to secede from the rest of the United States were given the green light Monday to begin collecting signatures for their initiative.

California’s Secretary of State Alex Padilla announced the ballot proposal had been cleared.

The latest measure would ask voters in 2020 to decide whether to open up a secession discussion. If passed, a second election would be held a year later asking voters to affirm the decision and become an independent country.

Advocates have until mid-October to gather 365,880 signatures of registered voters to get it on the ballot.

Breaking News from Fox News Alert.


  • The American Supreme Court has made clear that there is no leaving the Union.
  • Do you have a case citation for the US Supreme Court case, or are you just blowing it out your ass like always?
  • @SaremChuuk

    Calm down, my friend. Mentally underdeveloped folks like PawnStar are people we should protect not abuse. It's not his fault. PawnStar was built on a Friday (No, PawnStar, I'm not going to explain it to you).
  • Texas v. White, et al
    " Texas v. White, (1869), U.S. Supreme Court case in which it was held that the United States is “an indestructible union” from which no state can secede."

    The US Supreme Court Ruled that Secession from the Union is Unconstitutional and that the Union is indissoluble .Only way for California to do it is by Revolution or Constitutional convention where 2/3 of the states will have to agree, which is highly unlikely and will never happen. California plans to break away from the Union, Northern California plans to break away from the this break away state and remain within the Union. There is also another movement to break apart California into 3 different State. Of these 3 the making up 3 different states from California has more chance of becoming reality than California seceding the Union.

    The only other option is revolution/armed conflict.
  • @PawnStar

    You can post links to the internet, congratulations. You're still mentally under developed and feeble minded. You're posts are also heavily opinionated which take away from their credibility. Sorry, try again.
  • xectms, be quiet while the adults are talking. The crayons are on the corner, please go and join red snapper on that corner.

    As I was saying Texas VS White shows us that the supreme Court decision on this subject is clear. No backing out no break away and no seceding of the Union is possible.

  • Thank you. And if the same principle applies to Chuuk, on the same reasoning, then neither Chuuk nor California can ever secede from the union of states they joined.

    Checkmate, Taxi.
  • edited April 2018

    Look who's talking? LOL. Go polish your gun, deputy.


    First of all, I have no opinion on whether Chuuk should secede or not. I'm neither for nor against.

    Having said that, I think it's important to establish whether we all agree that the rule of law, in a democratic system, requires the consent of those governed. It's also important to establish whether we agree that laws should not be timeless but rather subjected to norms and socio-political requirements of the governed relative to the present day. To paraphrase, if the laws of our forefathers are no longer relevant, no longer apply, or we simply no longer believe the same thing, the people, living and breathing in the present time, should possess the right and ability to amend the law.

    If we do agree to those assertions then there seems to be only one acceptable outcome for Chuuk and California.
  • Looking forward for the day Chuuk secede from the rest of FSM. I hope soon, so the remaining FSM states can throw a big celebration across of Micronesia!
  • The US Supreme Court is clear on this on the US side because they went through a civil war, and that civil war was to preserve the union. The federal government/Abraham Lincoln won and thus the union was preserved.

    If chuukese vote by Majority to leave/secede the federation then yeah they can. It all depends on the will of the Majority of chuukese not the elected officials in chuuk.
  • @PawnStar

    This is weird. I actually agree with you on the last post.
  • @xectms and @Pawnstar Im not gonna recommend getting a room again you just love each other too much!!lol

    Words of the day: indissoluble
    : revolution
    : constitutional convention
    I wonder which one the Legendary Soumadau would recommend? Hm?
  • @dearhunter

    I'm embarrassed to say you are definitely right. This has gotten out of hand. Thanks for the wake up call. I'm gonna bow out.
  • LOL@ Im so sorry ma man! You can bow down but never out!
  • LOL. You know what I mean. I'm going to "retire" from this conversation. I need find more productive shit to do, anyways.


    You have proven yourself a credible debater on this Forum and on this Secession topic with your Texas v White cite. Your last point that the issue will be decided by the Chuukese voters, and not by any official, state or national, is also correct. Thank you.

    Sarem, we did come across the Texas v. White case in our research for the Chuuk State Commission. We decided it is not on point on the constitutionality of Chuuk's Independence Movement since the respective operative provisions in the US and FSM constitutions are different. The present language and structure of the FSM Constitution do not prohibit a FSM state secession from the FSM Federation. We can give share with you more if you are interested.
  • Correct you are Taxi, citing any outside example to prevent Chuck leaving is nonesense. The federation is a modern construction while Chuuks culture and identity predates the FSM constitution or that of the US or it's constitution. Some can argue that the federation is a byproduct of colonialism therefore oppressive.

    FSM is only 30+years old while chuuks history is over a thousand. thousand years of independence vs 30 years of colonialists federation.

  • California wont succeed anytime in our lifetimes.

    Free counters!
  • Taxi, pwipwi, you know better than to say that Texas v. White does not apply because "the respective operative provisions in the US and FSM constitutions are different. The present language and structure of the FSM Constitution do not prohibit a FSM state secession from the FSM Federation."

    As you know, no provision of the US Constitution prohibits state secession either. And yet in Texas v. White the US Supreme Court found that as a matter of constitutional law secession was impossible:

    "When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States."

    you and your friends who seek to destroy the FSM nation and the State of Chuuk are incorrect that you can review legal authorities and ignore them because they do not fit your narrative. As you are well aware, this question will not be decided by a simple vote of the Chuukese people. If you ever get to that point (the possibility of which is in doubt), the matter will be heard by the FSM Supreme Court, and then by the Appellate Division of the FSM Supreme Court. The FSM Supreme Court will be the ultimate decider on the question of the constitutionality of secession under the FSM Constitution, not the Chuuk Independence Commission.

    And as you also know, since the time that Justice King sat as Chief Justice, where a question of constitutional interpretation in the first instance is presented, and there is no FSM law on point, the FSM Supreme Court will look to decisions from the United States to inform its legal views on the issue. And absent any clear law to the contrary, it will apply Texas v. White and come to the same conclusion.

    Just because you and your friends choose to ignore Texas v. White doesn't mean the FSM Supreme Court will do so as well.
  • chuuk state need to pay up all it owe before even think about running away from the
  • Visafree,

    Just keep laughing, but do not show how uninformed you are on the issue.


    Calm down. You are predicting the Independence question will be defeated at the plebiscite?

    On the question on binding applicability of Texas v White on a FSM Supreme Court decision on Chuuk's Independence Movement, let's deal with that when it comes up. You have not pointed to a specific provision of the FSM Constitution why the Independence Movement is prohibited and should be defeated. The FSM Supreme Court itself, CJ King himself, also directed we cannot just adopt American constitutional principles for the FSM without assessing the applicable relevance of that principle to the Micronesian situation/setting.

    Despite your and others' hot temper against Chuuk's Independence Movement, there is no constitutional reason (i.e textual, intent, history or social) why FSM Chief Justice Yamase and AJ Wenworth would impose Texas v White on the Chuuk's Secession Movement.

    Please let the Chuukese people decide the issue for themselves. You all can go look for more rewarding enterprises for yourselves than criticizing Chuuk's Movement just for the heck of it. Dont waste your precious lives.
  • Taxi, its my duty to tell you that Sarem is a white man. One of the many ex peace corps volunteers who trying to force their will on micronesian Political scene. Same thing is happening in the RMI and here in FSM.

    Savior complex, they think they can save us from ourselves.
  • A former Peace Corp? I thought he is one of our brothers in the legal profession from the Chuuk State Supreme Court.
    Well thank you and Saram for your contributions to the subject of Chuuk's Independence Movement. Let's not have feeble minds and hearts about it.
  • I'm seriously wondering why and for what purpose??.. the chuuk's independent movement?.. just wondering out lud here..cheers!!
  • Taxi, our friend Sarem is a Jew who came to micronesia/FSM to "Civilize" us through the Peace corps program, decided to remain to save us from ourselves. He is a white man who think he can save us.

  • lol@PawNStaR. Now im afraid to voice my views on this. Good bye!
  • And our friend Visafree sounds as lost as a lot of our Chuukese citizens abroad and locally. He wants to know "what is the purpose of the Chuuk Independence Movement?"
    Visa, do you mean the "purpose" or the "reasons?"
    The "purpose" is simple and straightforward: Chuuk wants to become an independent nation.
    The "reasons" are several and are subject to endless debate like we are doing on this Forum now.
    I apologize I cannot go through discussing the "reasons" now because of limited time, but will try sometime this week if you will please wait just a few days. thank you for your patience and understanding.
Sign In or Register to comment.