'Texit', 'Calexit' and beyond: Independence movements in the US

In the United States, a country founded on the principle of independence, movements persist that seek to challenge the authority of the federal government and claim sovereignty for specific regions. Although these movements do not have the scope or mass support of independence causes in other parts of the world, such as Scotland, Quebec or Catalonia, they reflect deep tensions over regional identity, local autonomy and the role of the central government.

Texas

The most prominent independence movement in the United States is undoubtedly that of Texas, which took shape as Texit in the 1990s.

This push, led by the Texas Nationalist Movement (TNM), seeks for the state to become a sovereign nation, evoking its past as the Republic of Texas (1836-1845).

For many conservatives, Texas represents a bastion of traditional values, such as hard work, faith and rejection of Washington bureaucracy, which is why the TNM argues that the state, which boasts an economy that rivals that of mid-sized countries and a unique cultural identity, does not need the federal government to prosper.

However, the strength of the movement increases or decreases according to the Administration in power.

The election of Barack Obama in 2008 and policies perceived as progressive - such as healthcare reform (Obamacare) - gave a boost to the movement by generating fears among Texan conservatives of over-centralization.

The movement gained new momentum during the Biden Administration (2021-2025), particularly due to the immigration crisis at the border with Mexico.

On the other hand, during the previous term of Donald Trump(2017-2021), the movement weakened due to its alignment with many of the Republican's policies, although it did not disappear. A similar situation is happening today following Trump's victory in 2024.

Moreover, beyond political and economic issues, on a cultural level there is a distinct identity, forged by its history, its mix of Anglo, Hispanic and ranchera cultures, and an ethos of independence.

California

At the other ideological extreme, California is home to the Yes California movement, which was created in 2014 and promotes the Calexit, with the idea that the state has a distinct economy, culture and values that justify its separation from the United States.

This movement gained traction after the first election of Donald Trump in 2016, as it is a largely progressive state in the face of a federal government perceived as conservative and disconnected.

Proponents argue for independence because California has a large economy - the fifth largest in the world if it were a country, according to the US Bureau of Economic Analysis and the International Monetary Fund in 2023.

Likewise, they also stress its leadership in technology and culture to be able to flourish as an independent country.

For conservatives, however, the Calexit is viewed with skepticism, even some disdain. California, with its left-wing policies such as high taxes and strict environmental regulations, represents the opposite of America's founding values.

Although the movement insists that the state could govern itself, it has a heavy dependence on national trade and a lack of broad support. In fact, it peaked at 32% in 2017, but there is no solid evidence of a significant increase in 2025. Nationally, support was 22% in 2017.

Hawaii

The independence movement in Hawaii has unique historical roots. The annexation of the archipelago in 1898, through the signing of the Newlands Resolution and following the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893, has been regarded by many natives as an act of illegitimate occupation.

The Ke Ea Hawaiʻi (Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement) movement, which encompasses the archipelago's independence groups, seeks to restore the Kingdom of Hawaii or, at the very least, to achieve a status of greater autonomy.

This case poses a dilemma, as on the one hand it seeks to respect the desire to preserve local culture and identity in the face of homogenization. However, Hawaii's integration into the United States, confirmed by the 1959 plebiscite, when an overwhelming majority (94.3%) of islanders voted to be admitted as the 50th state of the Union, in addition to its strategic and economic importance, makes secession unrealistic.

Lakota

The Lakota Freedom Movement is one of the closest efforts to an indigenous independence movement on the continent. Centered on the Lakota (Sioux) nation in South Dakota, this movement seeks to establish an independent Lakota Republic.

The modern movement took shape in 2007, when activists led by Russell Means, a former member of the American Indian Movement (AIM, symbolically declared the independence of the Lakota nation, repudiating the treaties with the United States as violated. However, the roots go back to decades of activism, such as the 1973 occupation of Wounded Knee by AIM.

The Lakota argue that the US government breached treaties such as that of Fort Laramie (1868), which promised lands in perpetuity, especially the Black Hills.

They sought sovereignty over a territory encompassing parts of South Dakota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming and Montana, citing extreme poverty, discrimination and cultural loss as justifications.

However, the creation of an independent nation is seen as impractical, as it would fragment the US territory and lacks broad support, even among the Lakota themselves.

Vermont and other minor efforts

In Vermont, the Second Vermont Republic, a movement founded in 2003, advocates regaining the independence the state had between 1777 and 1791. This movement, although small, appeals to a rural and progressive identity that contrasts with the federal government.

However, everything seems to indicate that Vermont lacks the economic base to sustain itself as a nation, and this independence rhetoric seems more of a symbolic exercise than a concrete proposal.

Other states, such as Alaska and New Hampshire, have seen sporadic independence proposals, often driven by libertarians or conservatives frustrated with the reach of the federal government.

Legal hurdles and the danger of fragmentation

Independence movements face complex obstacles. In principle, the Constitution does not permit secession.

Moreover, although independence movements appeal to regional pride, secession could have devastating consequences. The United States is more than a collection of states; it is an idea based on freedom, order and opportunity. Dividing the nation would weaken its global position, especially vis-à-vis powers like China or Russia, which benefit from internal discord.

Economically, states like Texas or California, though powerful, depend on domestic supply chains and markets.

Moreover, secession would open Pandora's box. If Texas or California were to leave, what would prevent other states or regions from following suit?

For many analysts, the Civil War, with its cost of more than 600,000 lives, demonstrated that the union should prevail, not because it is perfect, but because it is the best way to protect individual liberties.