Blue States: It Is Time For Soft Secession

What Is Soft Secession?

In a phrase: nonviolent noncooperation. Soft secession is when states and cities refuse to cooperate with a derelict or illegitimate federal government—not through violence or formal separation, but through the reassertion of local sovereignty. For example, States that protect abortion access even as the federal government refuses to act. Cities that deny ICE access to their property. States that pass stronger gun safety and minimum wage laws than federal standards.

But the problem is, these are all still reactive measures—steps taken only after the harm done. We now need proactive soft secession: policies that anticipate and recognize federal failure and act before lives are lost or rights are stripped. Why should states have to wait for their residents to starve due to lack of SNAP funding, when they can act proactively to prevent the starvation in the first place?

When Washington cannot or will not perform its basic obligations, states not only have the right but the sovereign duty to act. It is time for Democratic states to move from defensive posturing to proactive protection—to use their constitutional authority to safeguard their residents’ economic security and human rights with soft secession.

States Have an Economic Obligation to Protect Their Residents

Every state government has both a moral and constitutional obligation to safeguard the welfare of its people. That obligation does not disappear during a federal shutdown. When the federal government stops feeding hungry families or blocks already-approved infrastructure funds, the states must step in. They are not only justified—I argue they are economically and legally obligated to do so. For example, the Constitution to my home State of Illinois declares this in its very Preamble:

We, the People of the State of Illinois - grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty which He has permitted us to enjoy and seeking His blessing upon our endeavors - in order to provide for the health, safety and welfare of the people; maintain a representative and orderly government; eliminate poverty and inequality; assure legal, social and economic justice; provide opportunity for the fullest development of the individual; insure domestic tranquility; provide for the common defense; and secure the blessings of freedom and liberty to ourselves and our posterity - do ordain and establish this Constitution for the State of Illinois.

How can any of the bolded provisions be fulfilled if the 2 million Illinoisans on SNAP—more than 15% of our population—suffer in poverty, economic injustice, and stunted development due to lack of food? They cannot. Allowing Illinois’ residents to starve while Washington hoards Illinois’ tax dollars is an abdication of Constitutional duty. And this injustice becomes even more extreme when you consider that blue states prop up red states and our entire national economy. Consider the numbers:

• From 2018 to 2022, individuals and organizations from blue states contributed nearly 60% of all federal tax receipts. Red states contributed only 40%.

• This amounts to a $1 trillion transfer payment from blue to red states—or $4,300 per capita.

• On the county level, blue counties make up 71% of the U.S. economy, while red counties make up just 29%.

In short: however you slice it, Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, Social Security, Education grants—blue states are bankrolling red states, and red states are actively undermining democracy in return. That’s not federalism. That’s economic extortion.

When the federal government refuses to deliver on its end of the bargain—when it blocks food aid, infrastructure funds, and disaster relief to punish political opponents—states have the right to withhold their payments and redirect that money to protect their own residents. It’s not revolt. It’s survival.

The Supremacy Clause Has Limits

Critics will cry that this violates the Supremacy Clause. It does not. Article VI of the Constitution holds that federal law is the “supreme law of the land”—when there is a conflict. But that clause has limits, and it cuts both ways.

1. The federal government cannot commandeer state governments, which is one reason states have laws that differ from each other on property, marriage, divorce, employment, etc—a principle the Supreme Court has repeatedly reaffirmed.

2. The federal government cannot compel states to regulate private activity, such as forcing local police to carry out immigration arrests on behalf of ICE.

3. The Supremacy Clause does not prevent states from setting higher standards of protection or welfare.

For example, the federal minimum wage is $7.25/hour. But 34 states have passed higher minimum wages, including California at $16.50/hour. The federal government cannot force California to lower its wage to the federal level—even though, technically, that’s a conflict.

By the same logic, if Washington refuses to release food or infrastructure funds, a state can—and must—use its sovereignty to protect its residents. Why? Because states have passed into law higher standards of protection and welfare, and have sovereign authority to act upon its higher standards. This is not defiance; it’s the literal fulfillment of the Tenth Amendment’s guarantee of state powers.

“Won’t Republicans Do the Same Thing?”

They already have. Red states have nullified federal immigration enforcement, rejected Medicaid expansion, and ignored environmental laws. So first, Democrats have nothing to fear—because the precedent already exists. Far from fear, Democrats should be willing to put up a fight to protect the basic civil rights of all people.

And second and more importantly, understand that the moral intent here is diametrically the opposite of how Republicans weaponize state’s rights. Republicans weaponize state sovereignty to strip people of rights—to ban books, criminalize abortion, and target LGBTQ Americans. Democratic states should use sovereignty to expand rights—to feed the hungry, build infrastructure, and protect the environment.

That distinction matters. One seeks domination; the other, dignity. This isn’t a violation of the Supremacy Clause—it’s a fulfillment of it. It’s using the same constitutional powers Republicans exploit to instead strengthen the safety and rights of residents. Why aren’t Democratic Governors, Mayors, and County Presidents already doing this?

Soft Secession Has Precedent—And It Works

Finally, soft secession is not a new or radical concept. It’s part of America’s historical and constitutional DNA. Some of the most transformative moments in U.S. history were acts of non-cooperation with federal failure:

• The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850: Northern states like Vermont passed legislation refusing enforcement of The Fugitive Slave Act, and Wisconsin’s Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional, and therefore unenforceable.

• The Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s: Many cities and states refused to enforce segregation before federal intervention finally banned racial segregation.

• LGBTQ rights of the 2000s: Massachusetts recognized same-sex marriage a decade before the Supreme Court did.

• Marijuana Legalization of the 2010s: States like Colorado and California legalized cannabis despite federal prohibition—and now Congress is finally catching up.

Each began as a defiant act of soft secession—and each expanded access to justice for millions proactively, rather than waiting for the Federal government to catch up.

Soft secession is not about abandoning the Union. It is about defending it. It’s about preserving the lives, rights, and dignity of those the federal government has callously abandoned or cruelly targeted due to their immutable characteristics. Blue states generate the majority of the nation’s wealth, and they have the power to ensure that wealth serves their people first. When Washington breaks its social contract, states must honor their own. When you have financial power for good and you do not use it, you are as complicit as those doing the harm.

So to Democratic Governors, Mayors, and County Presidents I say this. Protecting the rights of your residents is not rebellion. It’s responsibility. It’s the reassertion of state sovereignty to prevent famine, preserve infrastructure, and protect democracy from collapse.

The question is no longer whether Democratic leaders of blue states should act—it’s why haven’t you already?

Read the excellent piece by 

[Top image: An upside down American flag indicates distress and a collapsing democracy.]