The question Can Hawaii secede from the U.S. through legal means? has several upvotes and three upvoted answers. But four people have voted to close it, three on the grounds of it being a duplicate of Does Texas have a legal right to leave the Union or secede?, and one claiming that it is a political rant because of the examples chosen to compare with.

However, two people (of whom I am one) have said it is not a duplicate. I am bringing this here so the discussion on closure will not take over the comments on the question.

2 Answers 2


The question suggested as a duplicate reads, in full:

Many people, possibly even including recent Texas governors, think that Texas has a right to secede from the Union.

Does it, or does it not?

This asks only about what the state may do of right which would mean without requiring the consent of Congress or the other states. The question about Hawaii has no such restriction, and at least two answers are discussing paths that would involve actions by Congress. Those would not be valid answers to the suggested duplicate, and so, while closely related, the Hawaii question is not a duplicate as I see it.

As to the custom reason, the question has no appearance of being a rant, no opinions are expressed, no political theories are championed or even mentioned. The question does use as examples two authoritarian countries, but gives no details about the comparison, which could be removed by changing three words.

I don't see either of these as good reasons to close a question, and the presence of multiple upvoted answers suggests otherwise to me.


There is a number of claims, which rise to the level of an urban legend, that Texas has a historical right to secede. As the linked answer shows, it does not. But the persistence of such claims makes the question about Hawaii different.

Answering the question about Hawaii does not involve debunking false historical claims. In other words, it allows considering this (obviously hypothetical) question in isolation from the other questions (present in the case of Texas).

The only possible reason I can see for closing it would be that it invites speculation since there is no established law on the topic.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .