(NaturalNews) Did the Civil War "settle" the issue of secession? Most Americans think so.But not all. In fact, some continue to believe that secession remains an option for states who are dissatisfied with the level of interference in state affairs by the federal government, which seems to grow larger and more powerful by the year.One such group is located in, unsurprisingly, Texas, a state whose citizens have been historically independent-minded and lovers of liberty. In fact, the group is currently traveling the state to whip up support for the notion of secession.As reported by the, the Texas Nationalist Movement, as the group is called, has launched its Take Texas Back Tour , with speaking engagements booked in 20 cities throughout the state. The organization says it wants to collect enough signatures to get a Texas secession amendment on the 2016 ballot. And while that really isn't possible since only the state Legislature can put referendums up for vote, the group nevertheless hopes to generate interest in the idea.Thus far, as of this writing, the venues are small – 62 at a Fort Worth gathering; 88 at a Tyler event – but part of what could be keeping Texans away is fear of reprisal by the federal government. After all, state and federal officials raided an event sponsored by the Republic of Texas , a pro-secession group, in March.As I reported then:While the notion of secession is not one the federal government would take seriously (or lightly), the idea will no doubt appeal to a great deal of Texans who believe that their statestand on its own again. Not only is the Texas economy red-hot, they argue, it would be nice to once again have a say in how much government should, and should not, be in their lives. And, they say, the state could finally protect its borders, since the federal government is doing such a lousy job of it.Interestingly enough, the issue of secession was never really addressed in the Constitution. Despite the fact that the issue was considered closed after the Civil War, one reason why the Southern states left the union to join the Confederacy was because it was widely believed, at the time, that secession was always an option for a state, albeit an unspoken one.The concept of secession – the right of a state to voluntarily leave the United States, just as it had voluntarily joined – was central to the conflict, in fact. Secession was espoused by most leaders in the states that formed the Confederacy – Texas, Arkansas, Tennessee, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Louisiana and Mississippi. They believed "the right to withdraw from the Union had been reserved by some of the States when they ratified the Constitution."As believers in "states' rights," they adhered to a "right" they believed "had been universally acknowledged in the early days of the Republic," with "New England on more than one occasion" thinking of "exercising it."This early principle of the, as it would eventually become known, stems from the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798, which were authored by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.Little of this matters to most Americans today, of course, because again, they believe the issue to be settled. But as more and more Americans become frustrated by a powerful central government and federal court system that regularly encroach on state authority, the concept of secession will only grow.And perhaps it should. If nothing else, a state legislature declaring itself "free" of Washington in this day and age might just be the kind of political tactic that finally sends a message to Washington that lawmakers and policymakers – and the president – they will hear, and heed.Elections, after all, don't seem to change much.[1] Lee, Susan Pendleton. (1899, 1907)."The Right of Secession." Lee's New School History, p. 253. Reprinted in 1995. Boise, ID: Grapevine Publications.[2] Ibid. at 253.[3] In historical context, the concept of "States' Rights" centers around imperium in imperio, meaning, literally, "sovereignty within sovereignty", or division of power within a single jurisdiction. This is discussed at length by historian Forrest McDonald in his 2002 book, "States' Rights and the Union: Imperium in Imperio: 1776-1876," circa 2000. The Constitution indeed granted the central government vast powers but at the same time it gave legitimacy to the States' Rights concept.[4] Watkins Jr., William J. (1999). "The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions: Guideposts of Limited Government." The Independent Review, v.III, n.3, Winter 1999, ISSN 1086-1653, p. 385.