Secession and Federalism in the United States: Tools for Managing Regional Conflict in a Pluralistic Society

Abstract

This volume, incorporating the work of scholars from various parts of the globe, taps the wisdom of the Westphalian (and post-Westphalian) world on the use of federalism and secession as tools for managing regional conflict. The conversation has scarcely been more important than it is right now, especially in light of recent events in Catalonia, Scotland, Quebec, and the Sudan — all unique political contexts raising similar questions about how best to balance competing claims for autonomy, interdependence, political voice, and exit. Exploring how various nations have encountered like conflicts, some more and some less successfully, promises to broaden the perspectives of scholars, government officials, and citizens struggling to resolve sovereignty conflicts with full appreciation for the underlying principles they represent. In support of that goal, this chapter shares the American experience with matters of secession and federalism. Beginning with a brief history of secession in the United States, Part I reviews the American experience of secession at both the subnational and national level, with special focus on the paradigmatic cases of the American Revolution and the American Civil War. Both examples showcase the deep regional tensions that can surface within a larger overall polity, reflecting the challenges of pluralist societies more generally. The Southern states’ failed attempt to secede during the Civil War led to the formal disavowal of secession in the United States — leaving us to grapple with the meaning of what had already happened during the Revolutionary War, when the American colonies unilaterally separated from Great Britain. After considering the meaning of these wrenching moments in American history, Part II turns to our preferred means of mediating regional conflict, the institution of constitutional federalism. By dividing sovereign authority between local and national levels of government, federalism creates multiple simultaneous forums for political contest, competition, and collaboration that have diffused regional tension through engaged multilevel governance. Like all systems of federalism, the U.S. model cultivates the “sweet spot” between competing claims for local autonomy and national interdependence, allocating sovereign authority among levels of government where each best advances the overall goal. The availability of nested political sites for regional expression, interjurisdictional innovation, and negotiated governance have many benefits, including fortification of the American Union against the kinds of conflicts that might otherwise lead toward fragmentation. Part III acknowledges the aspirations and the limitations of the American model, and perhaps all federal systems, in coping with regional tension. Federalism offers useful tools for navigating the opposing forces of political entropy and political gravity that operate in all pluralist societies, but it cannot solve all problems. This part reflects on the challenges facing all federal unions, and the differences between the American model and alternative models that may be more appropriate for unions confronting more substantial regional diversity, or more entrenched regional conflict. The chapter concludes with brief reflections about when secession is more and less justified, based on competing claims for autonomy and interdependence.