A loud minority of Texans call for Independence, which is not really possible as far as I know, BUT could the Rest of the USA just kick another state (Not necessary Texas) out? Or is this also not possible?

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Because Congress has wide latitude to set its own membership by passing laws to that effect. The size of the House, for instance, used to increase on every Census, until Congress passed a law to fix it at 435. (A huge mistake, IMHO, and part of the reason why our politics are so wacky today.)

    This ensures that the Senate can never re-make itself to be anything other than the body with equal representation among states, unless the affected states also agree.

    • bitcrafter
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      This ensures that the Senate can never re-make itself to be anything other than the body with equal representation among states, unless the affected states also agree.

      Yes, that is exactly my point: if this restriction could itself be eliminated through the amendment process, then it effectively does not exist.

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        No, you don’t get my point, if that specific clause weren’t in the Constitution then Congress could enact a law to change how the Senate is constructed. The clause serves a purpose, even if it can be itself changed via amendment.

        • bitcrafter
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          If the purpose of that clause were to restrict the kinds of laws that Congress can pass instead of the kinds of amendments that are allowed, then why does it appear in Article V, which relates to amendments, rather than Article I, which relates to Congress?