TIL about the Texas State Constitution, Article 1.2, giving Texans a positive and explicit Right of Revolution.
From the Capitol website and the Texas Legislative Council:
All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.
How come this made it into the language at all? Was there any followup or development in positive or case law?
There's similar Right of Revolution clauses in New Hampshire, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Tennesee, and North Carolina, so there seems to have been a trend of thought at a given time among US lawmakers. Where does this idea come from, and where did it lead in practice?
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. - United States Declaration of Independence, drafted by Th Jefferson, July 1776
Jefferson pulled this from the Natural Laws of man; the states you listed just followed his lead. He was heavily influenced to those laws by the 2nd Treatise of Locke, which is where Life, Liberty, and Personal Property really came from, as we also see in Virginia's originating document by Mason;
Article 1 - That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety. - Virginia Declaration of Rights, drafted by G Mason, June 1776
Again, Jefferson's version;
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Texas has one, too;
Sec. 3. EQUAL RIGHTS. All free men, when they form a social compact, have equal rights, and no man, or set of men, is entitled to exclusive separate public emoluments, or privileges, but in consideration of public services.
The first is much more true to Locke's argument about the source of happiness lying within personal property (Locke's second actually deals a lot with what property naturally is and how it becomes owned, and what that means) - yet Jefferson does not mention this at all and scholars have suggested his influence from Locke wasn't present in other aspects of his life. Plenty of folks have compared Article 1 from Mason with the DoI of TJ, but interestingly that's not where similarities end;
Article 2 - That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all times amenable to them. - VDoR
Jeffersons;
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed - DoI
Texas';
All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit.
And;
Article 3 - That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation or community; of all the various modes and forms of government that is best, which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and that, whenever any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal. - VDoR
Jefferson;
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Texas;
The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.
Why include Mason's? His was actually first. It was published in Philly about the time Jefferson began the big one. They both pulled influence from the source work of several natural law philosophers but primarily on that of Locke. So what did he say?
The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions
And, more in depth;
Sec. 222. - The reason why men enter into society, is the preservation of their property; and the end why they chuse and authorize a legislative, is, that there may be laws made, and rules set, as guards and fences to the properties of all the members of the society, to limit the power, and moderate the dominion, of every part and member of the society: for since it can never be supposed to be the will of the society, that the legislative should have a power to destroy that which every one designs to secure, by entering into society, and for which the people submitted themselves to legislators of their own making; whenever the legislators endeavour to take away, and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any farther obedience, and are left to the common refuge, which God hath provided for all men, against force and violence. Whensoever therefore the legislative shall transgress this fundamental rule of society; and either by ambition, fear, folly or corruption, endeavour to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other, an absolute power over the lives, liberties, and estates of the people; by this breach of trust they forfeit the power the people had put into their hands for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the people, who have a right to resume their original liberty, and, by the establishment of a new legislative, (such as they shall think fit) provide for their own safety and security, which is the end for which they are in society.
What Locke is saying here is that man is "equal and independent" and has a right to life, liberty, health, and property - "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
He goes on to say that the social construct we all enter is merely a means to secure our property and subsequent safety which permits our happiness, and in doing so we empower the government to regulate society for mutual benefit - "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"
As that being why we have society, and that being the role of govt, and with We The People being the source of all authority, they cannot oppress the populace by restriction of property or violation of man's rights - to do so violates Natural Law. Once that happens the legislature (govt) immediately loses all authority to regulate society and the power immediately falls back to the people to reform into an effective government set to secure their rights once more. "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
Again in Locke's words;
by this breach of trust they forfeit the power the people had put into their hands for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the people, who have a right to resume their original liberty, and, by the establishment of a new legislative, (such as they shall think fit) provide for their own safety and security, which is the end for which they are in society.