Well, would there have to be a war, though? I mean, technically, there isn't anything in the constitution preventing a state from seceding. So therefore, if any of these radical factions succeeded in getting one or two states to secede, there really isn't anything the federal government could legally do to prevent it.
Not saying they have a right to secede or anything. Although the other rights of the states have been tested now and then (remember Minnesota v. the United States Congress? or Utah v. U.S. Department of Health and Agriculture?), I'm glad the right to secede never has been.
But, to tell you the truth, I'd be worried about any administration which decided to go to war over that issue, instead of trying to settle it peacefully through the courts or arbitration. What else would such an administration be willing to sink to in this situation? Sounds to me like the kind of thing that could lead the U.S. going down the path of so many South American Autocracies (OOC: OTL Dictatorships).
Not saying they have a right to secede or anything. Although the other rights of the states have been tested now and then (remember Minnesota v. the United States Congress? or Utah v. U.S. Department of Health and Agriculture?), I'm glad the right to secede never has been.
But, to tell you the truth, I'd be worried about any administration which decided to go to war over that issue, instead of trying to settle it peacefully through the courts or arbitration. What else would such an administration be willing to sink to in this situation? Sounds to me like the kind of thing that could lead the U.S. going down the path of so many South American Autocracies (OOC: OTL Dictatorships).