You probably remember Marjorie Taylor Greene ranting about a “national divorce” between red and blue states. What you might not realize is that the divorce is already happening - blue states just aren’t bothering to send the papers.
While political pundits debate whether America is headed for another civil war, something much quieter is unfolding. It’s called soft secession, and it’s not about dramatic declarations or turning state nd federal law enforcement on each other. According to writer Chris Armitage, it’s about Democratic governors holding emergency sessions on encrypted apps to coordinate resistance, attorneys general filing lawsuits within hours of federal orders, and states quietly building parallel systems that make federal authority irrelevant within their borders.
The infrastructure for this resistance didn’t appear overnight. Oregon is stockpiling abortion medication in secret warehouses. California sits on about $15.7 billion in reserves and gets to decide how to deploy it. Illinois is exploring something called “digital sovereignty” - whatever that means, but it sounds expensive for the feds. Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey told MSNBC her state police would “absolutely not” help with Trump’s deportation efforts. She’s not bluffing, and she doesn’t need to be.
The beautiful irony here is that conservative Supreme Court justices handed blue states the legal framework for this resistance on a silver platter. The anti-commandeering doctrine from cases like Printz v. United States means the federal government can’t force states to implement federal programs. Justice Scalia wrote that the feds can’t “command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program.” Those conservative justices probably never imagined blue states would use their own legal precedents to ignore federal authority, but here we are.
Blue states have been practicing soft secession for years without calling it that. Twenty-five states - red and blue - refused to implement REAL ID requirements starting in 2007, delaying enforcement for nearly two decades. During Trump’s first term, Democratic attorneys general filed over 130 multistate lawsuits with an 83 percent success rate. They maintain “brief banks” with pre-drafted lawsuits ready for immediate filing - the modern equivalent of how Northern states coordinated legal resistance against fugitive slave laws.
The economic leverage is extraordinary. Some blue states are what economists call “giver states” - they send far more tax revenue to Washington than they receive back in federal investment. Massachusetts sent $2,623 more per capita to the federal government than it got back in 2022, and $967 more in 2023. New York contributed over $160 billion more than it received in the five years before the pandemic. Between 2018 and 2022, the blue states that pay in more than they get back sent about $345 billion more to Washington than they got - and pandemic aid meant no state paid in more than it got in 2020 and 2021.
Blue states are subsidizing red states to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars, and they’re getting tired of it.
Democratic lawmakers in Maryland, New York, Connecticut, and Wisconsin have introduced bills directing state officials to withhold payments to the federal government if federal agencies act unlawfully or withhold funds previously appropriated by Congress.
These aren’t hypothetical protest votes - these are operational blueprints for financial warfare.
The concept isn’t entirely new. Northern states used personal liberty laws to make fugitive slave laws hard to enforce - Vermont’s 1850 law made the federal Fugitive Slave Act “effectively unenforceable” there. What’s different now is the scale and coordination. According to Armitage, three sources on daily Zoom calls between Democratic attorneys general say the same phrase keeps coming up: soft secession.
Red states figured this out long ago. About 20 states have passed laws or declarations pushing back on federal gun rules - Texas and Tennessee literally call theirs “Second Amendment Sanctuary” acts and bar state agencies from helping enforce certain federal gun laws. Texas has been practicing soft secession for decades, cherry-picking which federal policies to implement. The difference is that blue states have more money and better lawyers.
We’re watching states quietly walk away from each other. Blue states will protect abortion rights, support organized labor, and defend individual rights. Red states will embrace Christian theocracy, suppress wages, and criminalize dissent.
The federal government will become just a hollow shell that states ignore when convenient.
The Adams County Sheriff case in Washington illustrates how far this goes. The state Attorney General is seeking an injunction against a sheriff for cooperating with federal immigration enforcement, arguing he’s violating state law. Local officials must choose between federal directives and state law - the same dilemma Northern officials faced during the fugitive slave era.
Democrats get nervous when you use the term “soft secession.” They prefer euphemisms like “resistance” or “federalism” or “uncooperative federalism.” But call it whatever you want - the result is the same. States are building independent systems that render federal authority meaningless within their borders.
The leverage is real. California alone sends over $500 billion annually to the federal government.
This isn’t about ideology anymore. It’s about math. Blue states produce nearly half of the tax dollars that keep the federal government operational, while red states take in most federal spending. When that relationship becomes untenable, something has to give.
Soft secession represents a fundamental shift toward a confederation of semi-autonomous regions rather than a unified nation-state. Whether that’s good or bad depends on your perspective, but it’s happening regardless. The question isn’t whether states will continue walking away from each other - it’s how far they’ll go before someone notices the federal government has become irrelevant.
I mentioned in a previous post this week that if you are a liberal and live in a red state - you might want to consider moving. Why? Because what should be clear by now is that no one is coming to save you. Blue states are circling their wagons and saving themselves.
Correction, September 28th, 2026: This essay first said blue states sent red states more than $1 trillion between 2018 and 2022 - the blue states that pay in more than they get back sent about $345 billion more to Washington in those years, and no state paid in more than it got in 2020 and 2021. It also quoted Justice Scalia saying the feds can’t make states carry out immigration policy - those words aren’t in his Printz opinion, which was about gun background checks; put California’s reserves at $76 billion - they’re about $15.7 billion; said Massachusetts sends $4,846 more per person than it gets back - it was $2,623 in 2022 and $967 in 2023; said eleven states call themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries - about 20 have laws or declarations like that; and suggested California’s tax board could hold up federal tax money - it only collects state taxes.
Update, September 28th, 2026: A few lines now credit Chris Armitage for the encrypted-app sessions and the sources on the attorneys general’s Zoom calls, say the states that fought REAL ID were red and blue, say only some blue states pay in more than they get back, give the years behind the New York figure, stick to what the record shows on fugitive slave laws, say blue states pay nearly half of federal taxes, and link the Healey quote to The Hill’s report. Much of this essay draws on Chris Armitage’s Substack piece of August 19th, 2025.