and legal experts said they would face obstacles.
Do they? Those at the top of government aren't following the rules anymore. Why should states still be bound to do so?
this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2025
903 points (99.6% liked)
politics
24926 readers
3283 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Bc that's the difference between these groups. One believes in the law and what it means. The other doesnt
So while yes, it would be great to see the Dems play hardball they can't without failing to uphold what they believe is right
Is it naive? Yeah probably. Will it be enough? Probably not
But going against the fed in a way that is considered "illegal" could be seen as declaring civil war. And while the fed can't live without it's taxes it can bomb you to hell if provoked
could be seen as declaring civil war.
To anyone paying attention, we've been in a cold civil war since at least 2016, if not before that.
“We ought to be really encouraged by what happened yesterday, and in spite of all of the injustice — which of course friends and audience of this show, of our friend Steve, know — we are going to prevail,” Mr. Roberts said, alluding to Mr. Bannon’s imprisonment.
He went on to say that “the radical left” was “apoplectic” because “our side is winning” and said, “And so I come full circle in this response and just want to encourage you with some substance that we are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be.”
This is Kevin D. Roberts of the Heritage Foundation. Point one is that he promotes the idea that the second American Revolution will be "bloodless" only if the left allows it to be, and point two is he describes it as something that is in the process of happening. That means it has already started and has been in motion.
We didn't fire the first shot of the war here and I'm sick and fucking tired of the people acting like us pushing back is "declaring civil war." No the fuck it isn't they declared war on us decades ago now. What a fucking joke. This is classic DARVO, Deny Attack Reverse Victim and Offender. It turns the victims of a cold civil war into the aggressors when the actual aggressors literally passing bills that will fucking cause institutional social murder at a grand scale. It's abuser tactics, plain and simple, at a national level.
Please don't play into this false narrative, the civil war is on, us fighting back isn't declaring it. Please stop letting liars and abusers dictate the rules of reality and what we accept as truth. You're letting their lies set the bounds for how we operate and it's that kind of bullshit that got us here in the first place. Stop giving them deference and treating their falsehoods as truths.
EDIT: Trump literally just suggested if Zohran Mamdani becomes mayor of New York City that he will withhold federal funds. We didn't start this war. Any suggestion otherwise is bullshit.
Point one is that he promotes the idea that the second American Revolution will be "bloodless" only if the left allows it to be
Fuck this asshole. "It won't hurt if you don't resist" isn't a civil war, it's a hostile coup led by jackboot-supported fascists.
It's literally also how abusers speak to their abused spouses. "Look what you made me do to you."
load more comments
(1 replies)
I don't know about you but I'm sick of being on the team that follows the rules and loses to the criminals that completely ignore the rules.
But going against the fed in a way that is considered “illegal” could be seen as declaring civil war. And while the fed can’t live without it’s taxes it can bomb you to hell if provoked
Not making a payment is seen as civil war? If its already at that point we're already done.
However, realistically not making a payment won't earn you bombs. It might earn guns though. What would that look like if a state withheld payment? Would a fed law enforcer with a gun go into an office, up to some state employee sitting an a cube responsible for making money transfers as part of their work, and have the gun in their face or threatening arrest if they don't make the payment to the fed? Would it instead be indictments of state government officials, and perhaps jailing them? Who would they jail? The Governor that signed the bill into law? The state legislature for putting the measure forward?
When high level state officials or low level state office workers start getting arrested, that moves the game to a different level. That escalation may have knock on effects on the citizenry. This would be especially true if the reason the state would be withholding the payment from the fed would be for cutting of services from the fed.
The entire basis for the Constitution's Bill of Rights, was to strike a balance between State and Federal power. It is a contract agreed to, by all parties. And contract law is very clear on what happens when one side breaches their contractual obligations.
These threats by Trump constitute a breach of that contract. If the States withholding tax revenue is considered illegal, then so is withholding Federal funding from the States. The State pays for those benefits, through their tax revenue. The Federal government has no right to withhold those benefits, without also voiding the contract that requires payment.
You don't have to pay for services you did not receive.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
Let those welfare queen red states pull themselves up by their own bootstrap
Please do this.
Is it not simply a matter of contract anyway? The states agree to pay the federal government in exchange for the security and cooperation that the federation brings. If the federal government is no longer holding up it's end of that agreement no matter the reason, why should the States be obligated to remain in that agreement?
I also see it as an honest matter of balance ... what they're budgettary short on from not receiving anymore from the government they must fill from own means that will be deducted from outgoing federal contributions.
For example Fema is to be dismantled and states need to make their own local disaster funds, meaning less budget to go to the federal government...
Ofcourse this will be a sour pill for the maga government and they'll use the SC to thwart it and enforce full payments to the federal government if they can get away with it.
Well legally, because that agreement simply declared the new situation. There's no exit clause, it's just how things are now.
Morally, nothing. Fuck the federal government. We technically deleted the first, the articles of confederation, we can delete this one.
Secede. Whatever happens in the US after this administration, there is no repairing the damage that has been done without violence. There is no restoring the Constitution, no repairing the rule of law, no restoration of democracy, no restoring affordable living, no curbing the power of billionaire oligarchs, no path to freedom, liberty, or sanity.
Escape is the only option that has a chance at minimizing bloodshed. Individual escape by emigrating, but what countries would want American expats now? so many are following the US’c corrupt lead. Special privileges for the rich, slavery for the serfdom.
Collective escape via secession and the creation of new independent countries is the only sane path forward now. Alternatively annexation could work, but I don’t see Canada or Mexico going out of their way to save Americans, for reasons that should be obvious.
So you don’t see Canada putting any effort into saving… California or the north east coast?
Let the red states have their trumpistan, I’ll lobby my new Canadian representative to veto aid packages all day long eh.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
Trump notoriously doesn't pay his bills after all.
This sounds like dissolving the union with extra steps ngl
And?
Blue states can only continue supporting red states that bite the hand that feeds for so long.
And in this case, biting the hand that feeds involves removing human rights.
So yeah. It's time to balkanize. Blue states will be fine. Red states can suffer and die for supporting a traitor and his treasonous party.
Honestly, we need to dissolve the union at this point. It's just common sense.
Look, it's time for a reality check. When a nation's political culture becomes this dysfunctional, there's no bringing it back, not without some massive bloody civil war that leaves millions dead. What they don't teach you in school is that every written law or constitution is ultimately meaningless. The Constitution does not enforce itself and neither does any law. They all require a certain amount of good-faith interpretation. It is always possible to come up with a strained bad-faith interpretation of any law that will allow you to do whatever you want. But in a healthy political system, this doesn't happen. Both sides practice restraint and realize that their overreach will be answered by overreach on the other side.
But if you lose that? The nation is effectively shattered. The United States, as a functioning democracy, is already dead. It's zombie corpse is just limping along. The president is openly defying the laws passed by Congress. The Supreme Court is openly corrupt, openly partisan, and ignoring the plain language of the constitution. It's all just might makes right now, and both parties view the other as fundamentally wicked and illegitimate.
Once your politics have decayed this much, there is no bringing it back. We need to peacefully dissolve the United States. Will it be easy? No. But we also shouldn't let one of our core national character flaws - American exceptionalism, blind us to the possibilities that exist. Plenty of nations have peacefully dissolved before. And they find ways to negotiate the hard issues like dividing assets, debts, obligations, military forces, etc. This has been done before, and it can be done again.
When this comes up, the "umm aktually" crowd also comes out of the woodwork. They'll point out that there's no actual constitutional mechanism to do this. These people are blind or have been asleep the last six months. You would think they would learn by now that all it takes to do something is that there not be anyone there to stop you.
We should grant all 50 states full independence. Just disband the existing federal government entirely. Let the states then come back together in whatever new nation or nations they want to form. How can this be done legally? Simple. Someone just needs to run for president on the platform of national dissolution, saying, "I'll grant all 50 states independence. I'll fire every federal employee, and I will not use any military force to stop all the states from seceding." And then they get elected and simply do that. Congress or SCOTUS can complain all they want; it won't matter. That candidate if elected would have an overwhelming political mandate, and there would be no way to stop them. Some may whine that it's unconstitutional, but who cares? It's pretty obvious by now that the Constitution is broken, obsolete, and no longer worth respecting. We're walking away from that broken obsolete piece of trash. We can do better.
I'm in.
Because you're right. Once Pandora's Box is open, that's it.
The Constitution has been nullified by not being adhered to. Our branches and Congress have ceded their power to what is effectively a king. Our Supreme Court justices have been proven to have taken bribes and are passing rulings completely in opposition to the Constitution without providing reasoning. The bar for president has been lowered to gutter-level. And a significant portion of our populace has been radicalized by lies from propaganda networks.
It's over. There is no coming back from this. You can't legislate your way back to reality because we'll never have the numbers necessary in Congress to make it happen and the president has been given the powers of a king.
It's balkanization for the Un-united States or total collapse across the board as we all cling to each other as we drown. I'm voting for balkanization.
I know it's something that's going to take people a lot of time to wrap their minds around, but the United States as we've always known it is over. This is what happens when you let conservatives have too much power.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(7 replies)
I would be interested in seeing if this is actually a viable strategy for more wealthy states such as illinois and california because I'm getting tired of the borderline suicidal "they go low, we go high" rhetoric. I know theres things in place to make sure it can't be done but the current admin isn't playing by the rules and we can't win if we keep trying to follow them. We need to start playing hardball with these clowns.
I’m sure Cali is getting sick of paying 80 billion more than they’re supposed to get back, only to have what you get back not even come to you.
I'm honestly surprised that newsom and pritzker haven't talked about this. Illinois alone is 4% of what the government collects yearly. I think I'm gonna do some more digging into this.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Sounds like the beginnings of a future civil war if those states actually follow through. It sounds like the right move though, I hope a bunch of blue states follow up on this!
load more comments
(1 replies)
This is an economic nightmare
That's usually what happens when a political nightmare assumes one of the most powerful offices on the planet
I’ve been saying we need to do this since the ass won the election. Nice to see my state finally listened.
Honestly, that's probably the most effective thing that can be done.
In business, where it really hurts, is in the money. Hit them where it really matters.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Might be the only way to stop him/gop
I’m down for this all across the board. Anything to take his power away.
No taxation without something something
Yeah keep attacking CA, NY, MA, shithead.
Without their money you're literally fucked.
Trump will be fine.
The US government will be fucked.
There is, a difference.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Yes, yes, please this. He's a rogue. He is not entitled to payments.
Laws not mattering anymore works both ways.
Good on them. Remind the federal government they get their power from the states and not the other way around. There is no point in paying for things like FEMA if FEMA is not going to pay out because of one idiot's stupid, greedy decisions.
Here. We. Go.
Please Oregon join in on this.
I keep seeing this idea, and I keep asking how is could even be mechanically accomplished, but so far no answers found. My understanding is most of the money simply flows directly to the Fed via our income taxes. Where in the process can the State interrupt that process?
Wouldn't basically everyone have to manually go adjust their W2 withholdings in order to stop paying the Fed?
States would need to set up special funds and force companies in their states to pay all withholding s into those funds, creating a middleman between tax payers and the federal government. Honestly, it’s a good idea even aside from present circumstances since it gives states additional options against the abuses of federal government.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
view more: next ›