Judge Anna von Reitz
It really does not matter for the purposes of the Federal Union that Texas came in as a “republic” or a “territory” or a “colony” either — Texas agreed to act as a State of the FedStatehood is a Capacityeral Union.
Being a “State” is a capacity — for example, you might agree to act in the capacity of an elector, or in the capacity of a wife, or in the capacity of employee in a book store.
In the same way the Body Politic of Texas can act as an independent republic, a State Republic, a State, or a State of State, or a Council of County Governments or, or, or.
Having agreed, Texas joined the Union and has been part of the Union as a member-State ever since. If it joined some other Union it might be called a “region” or a “borough” or a “principality”.
So in its own internal affairs, Texas functions as a republic— as all the State Republics are supposed to (though largely don’t) and with respect to its relationship with the other States functions as a State of the Federal Union.
I wish people would take the time to understand capacity. It’s really not that foreign to us. We all act in different capacities all the time. Why is it difficult to conceive of our government acting in different capacities? Especially when it is right in front of us? We can literally see that “Ohio” is different than “State of Ohio”—right? So why don’t people pick up on that fact?
I spend a good deal of time explaining the fact that The Texas Republic is a different entity from The Republic of Texas, which is a different entity from Texas, which is different from Texas State, which is different from The State of Texas, which is different from the State of Texas, which is different from the state of texas, which is different from the STATE OF TEXAS or TEXAS…… and you can plug in any other state in place of “Texas” and find the same array of capacities.