Reading an interesting article about how eastern Oregon inhabitants want to move the Idaho border further west so they become part of red Idaho. Is there any process in the US to change a state boundary other than an armed revolution? Apparently 11 rural Oregon counties have already voted to begin discussions on how to join Idaho.
Google tells me the last time it happened was 1961 between Minnesota and North Dakota but not sure how big that was.
I know parts of Norther CA and Southern Oregon have at various parts wanted to break away into a new state called the State of Jefferson but it hasnât happened.
Iâd imaging the two states would likely have to agree and Congress would have to approve it.
Thanks.
Article said there would need to be compensation paid to Oregon by the seceding part of the state. Article also mentioned Jefferson and indicated it would almost be impossible to set up a brand new state.
I know that Ohio & Kentucky re-negotiated the border in the early 1990s IIRC.
Historically the entire Ohio River was Kentucky. So if you owned a restaurant in a boat docked on the Ohio side of the river (this is a thing) youâd need a Kentucky liquor license. Youâd follow Kentucky labor laws and withhold Kentucky taxes for the employees working inside, but the valets in the parking lot were subject to Ohio labor laws and income taxes. Imagine how fun it was when a valet called out sick and the manager had to park cars while also doing stuff inside and now you have to split the managerâs time between Kentucky & Ohio.
And if you wanted to fish on the Ohio side of the Ohio River you needed a Kentucky fishing license. Not a big deal if youâre near a bridge, but more annoying if youâre not.
So Ohio argued that the river had widened since it was originally surveyed and the first 20 feet or so on the Ohio side should now be Ohio due to the widening.
I donât recall if Kentucky fought this in court or whatâŠ. I was a teenager who barely cared about such matters. I just remember thinking how crazy some of the implications were. Ohio does now have a few feet into the river though.
Thanks for this.
In Canada we have an issue different from provinces changing boundaries: some provinces want to secede. Secession is a more complicated process here; probably even more complicated in the US.
Yeah, Iâd imagine in any first world country there are issues including but not limited to citizenship, national debt (and state/provincial if any get broken up in the process), pension benefits & assets, military bases & assets & personnel, and probably a ton more that Iâm not thinking of at the moment.
If a guy originally from Quebec is serving in the Canadian army and is currently stationed in Saskatchewan⊠when Quebec secedes what happens? Does he stay in the Canadian army? Go to the new Quebec army? What happens to the pension benefits that heâs accrued assuming he goes back to Quebec? And the assets backing that pension?
My mind is a jumble just thinking about all of the stuff like that which would have to be figured out.
1 Like
Yes, it is very complicated.
But, these people somehow figured it out:
There has been talk about dividing California into two or more states. Also very complicated. But, my first step would be to listen to the Czechs and Slovaks.
Would Brexit also be a relevant precedent?
In the Czech situation, it appears both sides wanted the split to occur and worked to find the best way to make it happen. If part of California and Washington wanted to leave their current states, that might not be the case.
1 Like
Yes, very different from the Quebec situation where the rest of Canada did not want Quebec to secede and never more than 50% of Quebec residents wanted it. In the last Quebec sovereignty referendum in 1995, 49.4% of Quebeckers voted for separation from Canada: anything over 50% would have been enough to start the process. I canât imagine the turmoil that would have resulted if that 49.4% had been 50.0001%.
The UK and Europe were not one country so Brexit not quite as complicated as a country splitting. Scotland may split off from the UK though eventually.
I think that the last time the US saw a state split was in the creation of West Virginia around the time of the American Civil War.
Otherwise, it looks like only Maine was a state that split off of another one (Massachusetts).
In both cases, slavery was generally the driving issue resulting in the splits.
Agree with Alan about Brexit⊠nowhere near as complicated. UK and Europe are not nearly as intertwined as Quebec and Canada.
The breakup of the Soviet Union is relevant though. And certainly Czechoslovakia, although as you rightly pointed out⊠itâs different when both sides really really want it.
For that matter itâs easier to integrate under those terms too. West Germany certainly got a raw deal, financially, taking in East Germany but of course no one cared because their reasons for wanting reunification ran very deep and the West Germans were more than willing to absorb any cost in doing so.
Donât forget that there is an outstanding (if dormant) dispute over the QuĂ©bec-Labrador border.
Same with Georgia and Tennessee
Thatâs interesting.
Based on that it sounds like it boils down toâŠ
Georgia: The line is in the wrong place per the Congressional decree that determined the line, and we never once agreed to the current, wrong, location.
Tennessee: 
Donât listen to those meanies in Georgia. They waste water and we donât, so we deserve to keep the water access that theyâd get if the mistake were to be corrected. Who cares what Congress said about where the line is supposed to be?
If thatâs what it boils down to then I would expect the SCOTUS to rule in Georgiaâs favor. Granted, thatâs based solely on reading the Wikipedia article, so perhaps Tennessee has a stronger case than Iâm appreciating.
I thought SCOTUS had been pretty consistent in ruling in favor of defacto borders, with the exception of Ellis Island, when defacto borders exist.
Oh⊠perhaps they do. In that case Iâll withdraw my prediction.
Almost zero chance SCOTUS allows borders to be redrawn IMO, although if it becomes contentious enough in the future perhaps the compromise is that TN gives GA some water rights to make the dispute go away
Geez⊠it sounds like Georgia has been trying to get this rectified for 200 years. And they have a case. Iâd vote in their favor. 
Now I wish I knew the particulars of how the Ohio Kentucky thing was determined.
Yeah, TN giving GA some water rights would make it go away but it sounds like they donât want to.
Something something 9/10ths of the something.