Pearl Harbor Postponed = State of Jefferson?

Something interesting I stumbled upon last night.


https://www.viamagazine.com/destinations/jefferson-county-state-almost-seceded
http://www.mtshastanews.com/article/20081211/NEWS/312119971

In late 1941, the people of Northern California and Southern Oregon, angered by underrepresentation in their state governments, as well as the tendency of those governments to take the valuable resources, such as copper and timber, found in the area but neglect to invest in the area's infrastructure (it took until 1939 for much of the region to get electricity, and the roads were terrible), rose up in "patriotic revolt". They set up roadblocks and declared the formation of a new U.S. State known as Jefferson, with a temporary capital located in Yreka. Several counties in both California and Oregon signed on to become part of the new state.

The movement was strong for two weeks, even electing a provisonal governor, but the death of one of it's major proponents (Mayor Gilford Gable of Port Orford) followed quickly by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, led to the movement's collapse. Most Jeffersonians shifted their focus from secession to the war effort, and much of their grievances wound up being addressed anyway without need for secession - the U.S. government wound up improving the roads in the area in order to access the copper and chromite necessary for the war effort.

So, had the U.S. entry into WW2 been delayed for a substaintial amount of time (let's say a year or two), is there any chance that the Jeffersonian statehood movement could gain enough momentum to become a serious proposition? Or would it have just resulted in the same thing as OTL, with the government fixing a few roads and everyone going home?
 
This sort of thing has been talked about for decades and never gets anywhere. Local inhabitants can't change state borders on their own. "New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress." https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript

The only time a movement like this had any success was with West Virginia, but of course that had the exceptional circumstances of the ACW and the consent of the "restored government of Virginia." (To be sure there was a time before the ACW when it was proposed that the then-sparsely-populated southern counties of California leave the state and become a territory, but there wasn't much chance of that succeeding, either--the idea of division was backed by the pro-slavery "Chivalry" wing of the California Democratic Party, and not only did that group become discredited by the Broderick-Terry duel, but the US House of Representatives, which was controlled by Republicans, would be unlikely to give its consent even if the state legislature did.)
 
Actually, that's not quite true: Putting aside the case of West Virginia, There is another case of a state formed from another state's jurisdiction. Maine. IIRC, offhand, Mass surrendered jurisdiction, then Maine applied for statehood (IIRC, I think it literally was the Mass Senator read the surrendering document, then the Maine people read the request...)
So, for a state to be formed out of the 'de jure' area of another state, I believe the process is as follows: The State currently in existence quit claims the area wishing to be a new state, then Congress takes it up.
 
Actually, that's not quite true: Putting aside the case of West Virginia, There is another case of a state formed from another state's jurisdiction. Maine. IIRC, offhand, Mass surrendered jurisdiction, then Maine applied for statehood (IIRC, I think it literally was the Mass Senator read the surrendering document, then the Maine people read the request...)
So, for a state to be formed out of the 'de jure' area of another state, I believe the process is as follows: The State currently in existence quit claims the area wishing to be a new state, then Congress takes it up.
I doubt California gives up the claim over the area though.
 
The fun question is: "Can CA not do so under their own laws?" If a proposition passes, it's law, as how Cally operates.

Like I told a friend, if the 'new state' movement gets the hell off the ground seriously, in CA, and it does and is successful going the proposition route, popcorn for legal people time!

Side note: Doing a bit of research, and it appears that Congress in 1863, in essence stated Virginia (the state gov't, spc.) had no jurisdiction over US soil, due to it being in rebellion, as such, West Virginia could become a state due to being under no other state's jurisdiction
 
The fun question is: "Can CA not do so under their own laws?" If a proposition passes, it's law, as how Cally operates.

Like I told a friend, if the 'new state' movement gets the hell off the ground seriously, in CA, and it does and is successful going the proposition route, popcorn for legal people time!

Side note: Doing a bit of research, and it appears that Congress in 1863, in essence stated Virginia (the state gov't, spc.) had no jurisdiction over US soil, due to it being in rebellion, as such, West Virginia could become a state due to being under no other state's jurisdiction
So you'd need the voters of California at large to sign off giving up far Northern California?
 
How big of nonviolent protests would the rsidents have to do to make it not worth California's while to keep the area?
 
How big of nonviolent protests would the rsidents have to do to make it not worth California's while to keep the area?
The main value of those areas probably is the water.
1024px-Jefferson_in_United_States.svg.png

How much water resources are in Northern California? I'd bet quite a bit. Gold State residents might not like the idea of losing claim to it.
 
744px-State_of_Jefferson_Map.svg.png

It appears that upon some further research, actually the areas that would have formed Jefferson in 1941, were tiny to begin with.
457,859 people lived in the deep red-colored counties in 2010. 2,300,894 in the red and pink ones combined.
 
Last edited:
Actually, that's not quite true: Putting aside the case of West Virginia, There is another case of a state formed from another state's jurisdiction. Maine. IIRC, offhand, Mass surrendered jurisdiction, then Maine applied for statehood (IIRC, I think it literally was the Mass Senator read the surrendering document, then the Maine people read the request...)
So, for a state to be formed out of the 'de jure' area of another state, I believe the process is as follows: The State currently in existence quit claims the area wishing to be a new state, then Congress takes it up.

Thanks for reminding me about that, but again Maine was a special case because the Maine District was not even physically connected with the rest of Massachusetts.
 
Thanks for reminding me about that, but again Maine was a special case because the Maine District was not even physically connected with the rest of Massachusetts.

Doesn't matter. There is precedent. Between it, and West Virginia? Law is all about precedent.
 

ben0628

Banned
I believe Vermont might also provide legal precedent as well, especially since it's a state made from the land claims of two other states (as would be the State of Jefferson).

Edit: in the end I don't think it'd matter. Unless you can get support for it on the federal level, it can't happen.
 
Top