THE TRANSATLANTIC MAGAZINE
THE TRANSATLANTIC MAGAZINE
According to a January 2025 YouGov poll, Californians now feel "more Californian than American" and are reversing their sense of belonging since a similar poll only a year ago in February 2024.
Conducted by the Independent California Institute based in San Diego, the poll explores some interesting questions for the Republic of California, now the 4th largest economy in the world, in this moment of national upheaval. The name of the institute more than hints at their intention, but whatever the political undercurrent, taken together the polls reveal a clear and growing belief among Californians that their state is in a period of profound flux. Well over half (61%) said the state would be better off if it peacefully seceded in the next ten years. Even more (77%) felt that California should control its state borders "more like a country" while nearly three quarters (73%) believe that it is at least somewhat accurate to refer to California as a "nation-state". Having asked these questions both pre and post T2T (Trump's second term) it seems particularly important to note that the last twelve months have moved people away from the Union.
'Should I stay or should I go?' is a stark way of looking at the options now facing California but it offers a frame for the argument that the Trump redux is being incorporated into, and sped up by, a much wider shift in the current processes of globalization. We have arrived at a period of modernity that Zygmunt Bauman calls 'liquid times' in which states are no longer the solid entities we can rely on, opening an uncharted space for subnational entities around the world to call for the self-efficacy and control they understand as sovereignty. The fragmentation of the nation-state, at least as propounded for the past 400 years, is making way for a chorus of voices not only of states the size and weight of California, but smaller entities such cities, tribes, unrecognized nations and even non-state bodies in the global space. In California, this paradigm shift is playing out in a variety of ways but there are two main clusters of activity, reflected in the question posed by The Clash in 1982 – 'Should I stay or should I go?'. The first and most dramatic option would be to 'go' and many continue to make that case. Meanwhile, Governor Newsom is holding fast, though finding that staying has its own challenges.
Those opting to go made their latest move on January 23, 2025, when the California Independence Plebiscite of 2025, or Calexit was cleared by the California Secretary of State to begin the 180 day period of signature collection for their ballot proposition. Assuming they submit the required total of 546,651 (representing 5% of the total votes cast for Governor in the previous election) by July 22 (and they are verified) the measure would put the following question on the November 2028 ballot: "Should California leave the United States and become a free and independent country?" If at least 50% of registered voters participate in that election and 55% vote yes, it would create "a 20-member state commission on California sovereignty and independence from the United States". As the Calexit's website explains, this would not bring independence, but it would be a step down that complicated road, a road that, it should be noted, is becoming increasingly steep given that, at the time of writing and with a month remaining, they have only 210, 031 signatures.
However, too often we forget California's story of evolution; first as Nueva España (1535) then as Nueva California (1804) on to Alta California (1822), pausing very briefly as the unrecognized Bear Flag Republic of 1846, before its eventual birth as the Republic of California on September 9th, 1850, the 31st state of the United States. Yet even this multi-stage process has been littered with further struggles for identity.
According to Casey Cross, there have been 220+ efforts for the state to break away or to break up. Indeed, just a month before statehood, Agoston Haraszthy proposed to split the state in two (California in the north and Colorado in the south - the current Colorado still a quarter century in the future) while in 1941, the counties along the California-Oregon border formed the State of Jefferson with Yreka its capital and John L Childs, a judge, its elected governor. Pearl Harbor ended that initial attempt, but it was resurrected in 2013 by Mark Baird, a rancher, when he got the Siskiyou Board of Supervisors along with nine other counties to push for secession. Baird has since endorsed the "Greater Idaho Movement", a separate plan that would move the Jefferson counties into Idaho. More recently, Tim Draper, a billionaire venture capitalist, came up with a plan to break the state into six parts (eventually bringing that down to three) and personally funded Proposition 9. That initiative even made it to the 2018 November ballot but was stopped by a ruling of the California State Supreme Court because there were 'significant questions' as to its power in relation to the state constitution.
Indeed, both the state and the US constitutions pose significant hurdles to would-be secessionists. Section 1 of Article III of the state constitution calls California "an inseparable part of the United States of America" and further that "the US Constitution is the supreme law of the land". Technically, the US Constitution is silent on secession as it offers no path for leaving the union though the outcome of the Civil War combined with the Supreme Court case of Texas v. White (1869) seem to make it abundantly clear that states have no right to unilaterally secede and the Union's perpetual and indestructible nature was affirmed. Tantalizingly, they did theorize that states might secede through "revolution or consent of the states."
The second option is one of subnationalism, a path that has arguably been vigorously pursued by Gavin Newsom since his 2019 inauguration. The global logic behind his creation of an international infrastructure and initiatives such as his trip to El Salvador in his first 100 days was intensified the following year by the COVID pandemic as he overtly deployed the state's bulk purchasing power, arguing that the state needs to "coordinate and organize our nation-state status". California became the first state to implement a total lockdown and worked alongside other governors such as Andrew Cuomo of New York and Jay Inslee in Washington as well as a host of mayors across the country to address the crisis directly in the absence of national leadership.
Furthering those specific initiatives, Newsom invested heavily in building networks and partnerships primarily on topics related to climate change around the world throughout his tenure. These include new and revised MOUs (memorandums of understanding) with California's largest trading partners, China, Mexico and Canada, as well as Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Australia, Sweden, and Norway. It also includes deals with the Consórcio Brasil Verde (CBV) a consortium of 21 Brazilian states and the Mediterranean Climate Action Partnership (MCAP).
The state's developing global expertise combined with its emergency one-off efforts effectively laid the foundation of Newsom's activist, almost 'subnational-ista', position once Trump returned to the White House in 2025. California firmly in his sights, Trump issued no fewer than 87 Executive Orders in his first two months that challenge the state specifically. The Governor responded by calling a special session of the Legislature to approve funding for the state's Department of Justice and other agencies as well as setting up a fund with the sole purpose of fighting the executive branch.
Almost as soon as the first shots in Trump's tariff war were fired, California became the first state to file a motion for a preliminary injunction, citing the President's lack of authority under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act. Crucially, Newsom's previous global efforts made his instruction to state agencies to pursue new strategic trade relationships with international partners and his request to many of those same partners through high level talks as well as direct media appeals for exemptions for California products such as almonds, dairy and wine from retaliatory tariffs all the more credible.
Newsom may not have the constitutional authority to override or reverse federal tariff laws, but he has a clear platform to reassure his vast networks. As he said in his video statement: "To our international partners…the Golden State will remain a steady, reliable partner for generations to come, no matter the turbulence coming out of Washington". California has a "long-standing commitment to fair, open, and mutually beneficial global trade" and would seek to purse "strategic relationships with international trading partners."
No doubt his 'leading from the front' approach influenced his recent appointment as co-chair to both American Is All In (a coalition of US states, cities, businesses, and organizations committed to advancing climate goals at the subnational level) and the US Climate Alliance (24 bipartisan governors representing nearly 60% of the US economy and 55% of the its population) where Newsom will serve alongside Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers.
California has long struggled with its role as the largest and most economically powerful state of the Union, but it is worth bearing in mind that California is far from alone in what has become a global crusade by subnational entities. According to Grant Dahl in his article 'The Era of Secession', in the United States alone there are active secessionist movements in 12 states supporting either full independence, a new state, or a merger with a neighbor. The fact there is a Texas Nationalist Movement will not surprise many, but Dahl says there are also groups in Oregon (the Greater Idaho project), Illinois (Illinois Separation Referendum), Colorado, New Mexico, New Hampshire (NHEXIT NOW), Louisiana (Free Louisiana), Washington (State of Liberty), Minnesota (East Dakota Secession movement), New York and Pennsylvania. Such efforts make the call in 2023 by House Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene for a "national divorce" that would separate the US "by red states and blue states and shrink the federal government" all the more terrifying.
President Trump did not initiate the fragmentation of the nation-state, but he has clearly been a catalyst for new forms of subnational activism. Only time will tell how this stage in the global system evolves and what dangers it may pose but we would do well to remember that the other side of the 'Should I Stay Or Should I Go' double A-sided single from The Clash was called 'Straight To Hell'.
United Kingdom
Canada
Mexico
Japan
South Korea
