Could California Really Secede?
July 17, 2025
Host: Hon. Sam Rohrer
Guest: David New
Note: This transcript is taken from a Stand in the Gap Today program aired on 7/17/25. To listen to the podcast, click HERE.
Disclaimer: While reasonable efforts have been made to provide an accurate transcription, the following is a representation of a mechanical transcription and as such, may not be a word for word transcript. Please listen to the audio version for any questions concerning the following dialogue.
Sam Rohrer:
Hello and welcome to this Thursday edition of Stand In the Gap Today, and it’s also our bimonthly focus on the Constitution and American history. My guest today as regular is a constitutional attorney, author, and public speaker, David New. Now, the focus of today, though I’m going to say is not a leading headline feature in the controlled news. It is a headline issue and one that’s very real with extraordinarily troubling implications. And you’ll see what I mean in just a moment. This issue we’re going to discuss today, it is discussed in certain governmental circles. It is certainly an item of great intrigue by constitutional experts and attorneys, but it’s often discounted and generally ignored as something akin to talking about the big one coming in. California has been talked about forever, but life goes on and that’s the way it is. So what is this issue?
Well, it’s the talk about California, the state of California potentially seceding from the union, our United States as we know it, and becoming its own independent nation. You say, is that possible or is that just idle talk? Good questions are, should it receive any attention at all or should we just ignore it as some kind of a foolish child’s banter? Well, we’ll consider this carefully today. And the title I’ve chosen to frame today’s focus is This Could California Really Secede. Now here just a few facts before I bring in constitutional attorney David knew that may help to establish the premise that California seceding or seeking to secede is not pure speculation and should not be dismissed as just idle talk here. Just a couple points. Here’s the first one first. A recent poll in California indicates that a growing support within that state for secession may be the best thing for California to do.
As a matter of fact, many Californians are not satisfied with the United States and many of you listening from California right now probably are nodding your head. Many in California feel that California’s values are so different from the rest of the United States and it is actually increased after the election of Donald Trump just talking with someone. And I think my guest today, David New will make that clear. The president is extraordinarily unpopular in California, not the only reason they’re talking about it, but when the president federalized the California National Guard just recently remember this, upset many in the state and Governor Newsom’s popularity soared after that within the state when he objected to the president’s use of the California National Guard. Now here’s a second reason. There is a basis for a state to secede from the union, and I’m going to say it because of this, because states were once sovereign states and they yielded their rights to a federal government and hence the United Small U, the states.
Alright, now thirdly, California does have the economic standing to survive and indeed can thrive as an independent nation. Get this since its GDP, gross domestic product stands at $4 trillion, it’s got an economy larger than any other state with Texas being the second highest at 2.7 trillion. And according to 2024 numbers released by the International Monetary Fund, California at 4.1 trillion just surpassed Japan. That is at 4.0 trillion placing California only in size, only behind the United States, collectively China and Germany in global rankings. That’s an amazing thing, isn’t it? So here’s the question, can it be done constitutionally? What would happen to the US as a nation if this were to occur and what are some of the implications? We’re going to discuss all these things and more here today. David, new thanks for being with me today. An intriguing topic and a great deal about California. So I’m looking forward to getting into this discussion with you.
David New:
Well, it’s so nice to be with you and blessings to everyone with us today. I suppose this is a different way of celebrating July 4th in a sense.
Sam Rohrer:
Well, yes indeed. Well, independence is a different thing, so it’s in the eyes of the beholder to some degree, but let’s get into this. Are there other states, David, we’re going to go into detail in the next segments about California specifically, but just to broaden this, are there other states in addition to California for instance, that have formally discussed the concept at least of secession? In other words, has the culture of the US of 2025 moved to the point where the talk of secession by any state is actually should be taken seriously?
David New:
Yes, there are about 12 active movements within the various 50 states that want to boot from the United States as a nation about 12. Some of them are New Hampshire and New Hampshire wants to leave the United States. One of the things that got New Hampshire upset was the federal COVID policies. They didn’t like the way the United States managed COVID-19 and all that and now they want out and it’s largely being led by Republicans in the state. Here’s one quote, seven Republican New Hampshire legislatures are forming their own proposal to secede from the United States. This is a constitutional amendment that they have submitted. New Hampshire peaceably declares independence from the United States and immediately proceeds as a sovereign nation. All other references to the United States in this constitution, state statutes and regulations are nullified.
The other thing is that the argument against New Hampshire leaving is that New Hampshire gets about $1,300 per person from the federal government and taxes than what New Hampshire sends into the federal government. So they make money by being in the federal government. Their economy is about 12 billion a year. Taxes has always had an independence movement. About 33% of the population want to be out. There is a separatist movement in Alaska. They want out. They don’t like the way that the, in 1958 when the vote was put to the people of Texas, they didn’t like it was a yes or no vote, take it or leave it. And they didn’t like that. And that really ticked off people to this day. They weren’t given the choice of remaining a territory, becoming a state or becoming a commonwealth or becoming a separate nation. And they want that decision to be made all over again.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay, and we’re about out of time. David, you meant Alaska right there. You’re talking about right, not Texas.
David New:
Yes.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay. Alright ladies and Jim, you get the idea and there are others point being that the discussion of states being so upset, generally speaking with the federal government for various and sundry reasons are actually going beyond talking some having actual resolutions as New Hampshire. So the point we’re discussing about secession, it’s real. It’s not just idle talk does need to be considered. And so we’re doing that today here on the program. Could California really secede? We’ll bear down now looking at California when we get back. Well, as we move now into our second segment here on this hour program, if you’re just joining us perhaps for the first time, welcome aboard. We do in this program is we take headline news or cultural leading issues that I’m going to say have some significance from the standpoint of what God says impacts the individual, impacts the family, impacts the church, those kinds of things.
We select that there’s far too many items for us to cover in an hour program, but that’s what we do and we try and we always come at it from a very, very unique perspective. It’s the biblical perspective. That’s why we say headline news considered from a biblical worldview perspective and in light of the Constitution where that is applicable. And that’s just simply because this God’s word is the highest of moral law. The constitution in our country, United States is the highest or should be the highest of civil law. And because of that, that’s the framework which we do that all within the context of how God himself has laid out and ordered civilization, human civilization. Now I’m just going to stop there, but just give you just a little bit of an insight into why we do what we do and all of that for those reasons.
Okay, David, let’s go back. We’re talking now about a headline issue. It’s an issue, it’s not in the front pages except that sometimes it’s getting crowded out by all of the other things that are going on from Epstein to wars around the world to all of that. But when it comes to our nation, the United States, this is a big issue and that is secession can states secede. We talked about that in the first program, first segment and bearing down on California because California recently did some research was done there and 44% of Californians are actually in favor of seceding from the United States. That’s an amazing thing. So tell us just how big is the California economy? The first thing people would say, oh well it’s not even possible. They could never survive. Well, could they
David New:
Just before we do that, I would like to discuss not only about succession movements leaving the United States, but there are various parts of states that want to leave their current state to join other states.
For example, eastern Oregon, there are about 13 counties in Oregon that have voted as of May, 2024 to succeed from Oregon and join Idaho. Then you’ve got some groups in Illinois in the southern part of the state where several of those counties have required their local officials to explore the possibility of leaving Illinois and joining Kentucky. So you’ve got that going on. And then you’ve got some groups like in Northern California which want to make their own state all by itself the state of Northern California. Now getting back to California itself, this is a very dangerous situation. The number is 44% and it’s way too high. And it’s gotten high because in this state, president Trump, they have a visceral hate for him in this state. And what really pushed it over the edge and made that number as high as it was, was the nationalizing, the National guard that you had mentioned.
There’s also about 700 US Marine Corps soldiers on the ground in LA. And so many people in California are now describing LA as an occupied city and they don’t like what’s going on and they figure that they should be leaving. So if California leaves, would it be able to survive quite well because it has lots of money? Let me read some of the information about that. Let’s see. A new poll found that 44% of Californian adults would vote for the state to leave the United States and become a fully independent nation and is being led by a group called the Independent California Institute, the ICI. And they said this is a record high for them. And so as a consequence, here’s one of the interesting things this group says California, while currently as state has evolved into a nation in its own right and it is in our best interest as Californians to act accordingly, Californians have a shared set of values distinct from those of other Americans and that forms the basis of the California national identity. So that’s how you get 44% because after the election when Sister Kamala didn’t win a single swing state, a lot of neighborhood were not talking to me. They knew I was for Trump and it was a little while before they started talking to me again.
Sam Rohrer:
Alright David. So alright, so that’s that. Now I mentioned to GDP, the size of California is they have a lot of money, but when you put them in the ranking of nations around the world, they are just behind now the United States and China and actually the behind Russia, Russia’s 7 trillion and there’s other things that are happening there as well. But they are in the top 10 under any scenario of nations based on their gross domestic products. So in fact they could, they’ve got the agriculture, they’ve got manufacturing, they’ve got academic institutions, they have all of that kind of thing. So actually they could and they have a whole lot more natural resources than most countries of the world. So that aspect is true. They actually could, couldn’t they?
David New:
Yes they could. I would reconsider the idea that Russia has an economy of 7 trillion. I don’t think that’s accurate.
Sam Rohrer:
Well, I just looked at that. I just looked at that and again,
David New:
I questioned that number because Japan has a much larger economy than Russia and California is larger than Japan and Germany is larger than California. I know, but also you will find different numbers in different rankings for nation states. So you have to give a little bit of space if you come up with a different number in some areas.
Sam Rohrer:
Right, but the point being, and that’s why I mentioned that because it’s at least in the top 10, which makes this whole concept that they actually physically could and could sustain themself as a separate nation. They actually could. So that’s the point. Wherever they are, because the IMF numbers I’m finding are a little bit different than World Bank numbers a little bit different, but nonetheless, they’re all, it’s California would be in the top 10. Now who’s behind the move? David, who’s behind the move for California to secede from the union? You mentioned that group. Is that group a independent move? Is that an organized group? Is there a leader behind it or is it a group of people or what is that?
David New:
It’s called the Independent California Institute. Independent California Institute. And these people are, they’ve got some interesting ideas. Like for example, they think that 74% of California and state there should be a pathway to state citizenship for long-term California residents who don’t hold American citizenship. In other words, a lot of these immigrants that are in LA and throughout the state, California can’t give them US citizenship, but they can give them California citizenship. Then there also within this group, there’s about 71% that California should negotiate what’s called a special autonomous status within the United States, a special autonomous status within the United States. So it would remain a part of the United States, but it would be treated very differently than the other states where we would almost be on our own in many, many ways other than the way we are now.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay, let’s throw this into that as well. It came up in the whole LA circumstance, but there has been an effort for some time for a group to actually move California back under the umbrella of Mexico. There’s that group that’s been active for a long time. Do they factor into this whole thing at all?
David New:
Well, you’ll go to parts of California and they call California Cal or Mexican rather. You’ll hear a lot of people describe the state as Mexican because we took it from Mexico, we paid for it, but we took it and they think that therefore they should get it back. Well, there’s a little problem with our neighbors down south who feel that they should get California back. There’s a doctrine in the law called unclean hands, unclean hands. If I steal a million dollars from you and you see me do it and then later on you steal that million dollars from me, I can’t go to the police and the courts to get satisfaction and get my money back. I stole it myself. Here’s the problem with a lot of these people down south who feel that California belongs back with Mexico. Well, what did the Spanish do? They came to the new world. They landed in Mexico, the Conors. They took everything that belonged to the indigenous population in Mexico. Spanish is not an indigenous language, this hemisphere, it is a European language.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay. Alright David, we’re about out of time ladies and gentlemen. Stay with us. See, this is why American history becomes so important and considering constitutional issues, we would come back, we’re going to say now what does the Constitution say? Okay, David, in the last segment you were moving into, you didn’t finish your thought. Do you want to finish your thought or should I just move on here?
David New:
One of the other arguments, well first of all, concerning the Hispanic situation, I have told my Hispanic neighbors that we will be glad to give them California back and we’ll throw in the governor too if the Spanish and Mexico give back to all the land they took from the indigenous populations. And that generally ends the conversation.
Sam Rohrer:
That’s actually very good. Now, one of
David New:
The other things that California’s upset about is the electoral college. They’ve got a document called 16 Principles of California Autonomy and one of the biggies, the retention of the electoral college, which drastically reduces California’s influence over the United States choice of President. They can’t stand the fact that California has only two senators when there are other states who don’t even have a million people and they get two senators. And that’s because they don’t understand civics. They don’t teach civics in the public schools and they don’t understand why that is proper.
Sam Rohrer:
That’s right.
David New:
Why is that proper? It is proper because each state, regardless of size was in the original 13, a sovereign entity Delaware had just as much sovereignty as Virginia when the Constitution was written. And the same reasoning carries right over into the United Nations. You’ve got little Lichtenstein, which has an even a million people, they get the same vote in the general assembly of the United States that China does with billions of people. And China accepts that. Why do they accept that? Because Lichtenstein is a sovereign state just as much as China is a sovereign state. So we accept the disparity, the number in the Senate and the compromise was the House. We will make the House of Representatives based upon population. So California has a big swing in helping choose the president. Apparently it didn’t work too well this time for them. But anyway, that’s why it’s okay to have two senators for each state.
Sam Rohrer:
There you,
David New:
Let’s talk about the Supreme Court now.
Sam Rohrer:
Yeah, let’s go to that because when we began with Tars, talking it about this issue of secession is not a sensational thing. Oh it would be sensational if it were to happen, but it’s real. And we talked about the economic fact that yes, they have the ability economically to do it. Alright, now let’s talk about, as you say, the Constitution. What does the Constitution say and does it even provide for such a thing to take place?
David New:
There is one case where this issue of succession by the states was decided by the US Supreme Court, at least in dicta. And the name of the is Texas v White, Texas v White, an 1868 case. And the case involved the Confederate government, Texas, when it was part of the Confederate states of America, they sold some bonds to help finance the Confederacy. Well the Confederacy didn’t win the war. Praise the Lord. They didn’t win the war. And so now the issue came was that sale legal and it went to the US Supreme Court and the Supreme Court said the sale is null and void that the confederate states of America, Texas, Confederate states of America had no legal right to sell what they had. Here’s what the Supreme Court said. Let me read it to you very clearly.
Let’s see, the union between Texas and the other states was complete as perpetual and as insoluble as a union between the original states. There was no place for reconsideration a revocation except through revolution or through consent of the states. Now they in this sentence is saying, there is not a right for the state to leave the union unless we agree as the United States to let them leave. The Constitution makes no provision none whatsoever for Texas or any other state to take a walk. Here’s what the Supreme Court also said, why those bonds sales were illegal. Here’s the quote, our conclusion therefore is that Texas continued to be a state and a state of the union not withstanding the transaction to which we have referred, in other words, leaving the United States. So even though Texas was at war with the North, even though Texas made succession resolutions to leave and become part of the Confederate states of America, it meant nothing from day one. Texas never has a matter of law ever left the union. And that was true for all the states in rebellion. They never left the union.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay, alright. But let me come back and just sum this up then on that matter. If a state, and we’re talking the potential to secede New Hampshire, some legislators have been put into place a resolution where it would nullify. You said earlier in the program and a relationship between the United States corporately, the government as we now know it, if they were to put a referendum of that type before they’re voters of a state and the people of that state said, we want to remove ourselves. Are you saying that the Constitution would not permit that, would not recognize that
David New:
Not without the permission of the United States.
Sam Rohrer:
The United States being just a minute.
David New:
You cannot leave according to the Supreme Court. You cannot leave the United States unless the United States says you can go.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay now
David New:
And you’re going to get a lot of mail about this.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay, now let me,
David New:
That’s the position of the Supreme Court.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay? Now let me just to follow that up, alright, of the United States who Congress, a presently sitting Congress, that that issue would come before them or the court would come before that, which then would make the court above everybody else. So who are they talking about there? Unless the United States gives permission, who is that?
David New:
It would be the Congress and the President.
Sam Rohrer:
See, that would be an interesting thing in words.
David New:
Yes.
Sam Rohrer:
So in other words, if that would be a hurdle, that would be a hurdle in law for a California considering it. So a state, if they were to do that, essentially if that were to be followed, they would have to actually probably prepare themselves to militarily defend their right to do so because it doesn’t really exist under law. That’s what you’re saying?
David New:
That is correct. And by the way, all of these that I’m aware of, all of these succession movements, the one in California, the one in New Hampshire and so forth and so forth, are talking about leaving on a peaceable basis, not through violence.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay, alright, fine. So peaceable right now, would, the attitude wouldn’t exist right now for a Congress to say, all right, well yeah, then we’ll say goodbye to California and remove them from the US’ GDP and say goodbye to Silicon Valley from the standpoint of really in reality, could you see a Congress today at all coming to a point of saying, well, right, we’ll say goodbye to California.
David New:
No way. You’ve got to remember California has three power centers. Number one, it’s got, well it used to have just two. It was Hollywood and Sacramento. When you go to small law libraries and the United States, they will have their own state law library books, but they will generally have California. That’s how much influence California law has in this country. If you have a choice, you’re going to pick California. But now California has three power centers and the one that has now become number one is Silicon Valley. San Jose is the world’s number one computer center or technology center for the entire world. San Francisco is just about becoming the number one center in the world for artificial intelligence. There is no way that Congress of the United States is going to let that leave and walk out the door, forget it.
Sam Rohrer:
And from an economic perspective, which right now obviously is, if there is one thing that’s most important to say, this current Congress, the president of Donald Trump, it’s economics. And so when he says make America great again, he’s really talking about economically great, which is all underneath the deal making and all of that. So when you say economically, Silicon Valley Computer Center, the AI center there to the north, those as economic, I would say brains and the heart of a body, there is no way that anyone is voluntarily going to say goodbye to that. So that’s what you’re saying. And then you answered my question earlier on that you said no way. And that’s basically what you’re saying. There’s no way unless something would change so significantly right now from what we’re talking about that it’s not there to be done is what you’re saying
David New:
Is to go for some sort of a semi-autonomous status
Sam Rohrer:
That could be a possibility.
David New:
They could try, they could try that.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay. Alright ladies and gentlemen, all right. When we come back, we’ve laid it out economically, it can be done. We just kind of prove that again relative to AI center, computer center and all of that, that California has. But there are constitutional issues and there are practical issues that they effectively would say it’s not really going to happen. But coming back to California and the independence movement that has been able to drive the popular number up to 44%, okay, how should that be responded to? Because that is a real number. All right, David, we’ve probably done something on this topic so far on this program that may not have been done on any other program in the country and certainly not from this perspective that we’ve done it today. So I appreciate the work you’ve done in doing the research and the commentary and as we’ve tried to put this together again, it is real.
And so let’s go back now here to California. We tried to bring some resolve and that is the issue that there is, regardless of the fact that the Constitution does not really envision a state leaving the Supreme Court case as you talked about saying that the United States, meaning as we clarified in the last segment would have to be a Congress and the President agreeing to a state leaving that’s not realistic. But what is realistic is that there is a developing, I’m going to say a festering problem. And that is when you get the number of people in a state now up to 44% on that last survey, we started the program talking about that actually are saying we do want to secede. That is a lot of people and that does have weight, but in reality, at the same time, I’m also going to say David, from being in the office for as long as I was in Pennsylvania, I know that from a practical sense, the federal government though the states did start out as independent states and yielded their rights to a federal government.
The federal government has consolidated their power through, I’m going to say through seeking either through voluntary or involuntary submission by the states to the federal government. The states have actually yielded most all of the power that they had to the federal government because now they’ve been bought off by federal dollars, which ultimately came from the various states. So the federal government has built a web that it’s also very, very tough for the states to get themselves out of. So for all those reasons back here to California, the independence movement, we’ve talked about that either from your perspective, what is the solution to the California Independence Movement if in fact there is a solution that you see?
David New:
One of the interesting statistics is that if you took the National Guard troops that belonged to all the 50 states, they exceeded the size of the United States Army, which gave the states a lot of power just by having an army larger than the US Army. That changed at the end of World War ii, right around that timeframe is where the US army became larger than the 50 state government armies. And that’s an interesting transfer of power that nobody ever thinks about. Why is this happening? Why is this happening to California? There’s no question about why. To me, it’s quite obvious the more secular the United States become, the more balkanization of the United States will become.
One of the big things that liberals and progressives do not understand is the role that God has in keeping a nation united. These people think God divides America. It’s the exact opposite. God is the ultimate glue that makes us one nation under God. And they do not understand that under a secular system where you don’t have God as a central point of gravity, anything is possible because many of them don’t even believe in God that God exists. Now, when that happens, what does that mean? That means that a lot of people in California don’t like the story of America. The story of America is a beautiful, beautiful story. No other nation has the story that we have starting in 1620 and moving forward, both the good and the bad. It is a fantastic and incredible story. They don’t see that and they will lose that if they leave the union. But you see, this succession movement doesn’t have to actually succeed to have severe political consequences. Just having a movement that big and getting bigger by the month almost is going to have a damaging effect upon the United States and the unity of this country. We need to get God back in the center of this country. That’s what will bring America together.
Sam Rohrer:
And David, I had another question that I had in my thought process to ask you and you went there, but I think it’s worth pursuing further, and that is there is a succession movement identified by a name independent secession movement there in California. We spoke about that and all of that. But then I was thinking that there is also a secession attitude that is bigger than California and the solution to that. And you went there by answering the California circumstance, and that is the fact that in God we trust our motto was a unifying factor that brought all of our various 50 states and the people in them of course together. But when God is undermined and thrown out, which the Marxists and all of those, the atheist, the humanist, all that we’ve talked about in other programs here together about have worked so hard to excise out, they have known, we’ve talked about it, the enemies have known if they could remove and separate God and our roots from who we are, the plant on top, our United States as we know it would die and wither because the roots were cut. That’s worthy of building out a little bit more because David, that goes right to the heart of the matter. How do we take from your perspective and renew the roots if the renewing of the roots is possible at this point in time,
David New:
Hoping is that the United States Supreme Court, that there are at least five votes that will restore the 10 Commandments posting in the public schools that will restore prayer back in the public schools. If you want to look at the future of America today, what will be America like 30 years from now? Look at the public schools. If we can get God in these public schools that will have a dramatic change in this country.
Sam Rohrer:
Okay, David, we have about one minute left and I’m just going to do this. Ladies and gentlemen. Each of us have an ability to impact. We’re seeing movement of our nation away from God fast, really, really fast. When you cut the tether, the ship just blows in the wind and we’re blowing in the wind because we have cut our tether of humility and submission to God above. So I’m just going to close in prayer here right now because it is worthy of that heavenly Father. Lord, we recognize that what we’ve talked about today, this attitude of people separating from one another in a country first started as a people separating themselves from you because they feel we don’t need you, but Lord, we do need you. We know that. And I would pray that although we’re listening would hear and would then look in the mirror and say, Lord, am I in my daily life living as if I need you and independence to you and where I am able to give glory to God and recognition to who you are, Lord, that’s what we need to do. And we pray that this program today would help those who are listening to do that. In Jesus name we pray. Amen. David, new, excellent, excellent input. The conclusion was the highlight of all of it, the return to God, ladies and gentlemen. So David, thanks again for being with us. Lord bless you and those who are listening to us right now, thank you for being with us as well today. And may God bless you and stand in the gap for truth.
Recent Comments