This white paper analyzes the “Appeal to Heaven” movement to invite western Virginia and western Maryland counties to join West Virginia, focusing on its historical symbolism, legal framework, political drivers, economic implications, and likely trajectories. It is descriptive and analytical, not an advocacy document.

1. Executive Summary

In late 2025, West Virginia State Senator Chris Rose (R–Monongalia) launched a campaign titled the “Appeal to Heaven Movement,” proposing that dozens of conservative-leaning counties in Virginia and Maryland secede from their current states and join West Virginia. The initiative builds on earlier, more limited 2021 overtures from several western Maryland counties and on a 2025 border-localities bill introduced by West Virginia Delegate S. Chris Anders. 

The movement invokes Revolutionary-era and Lockean symbolism (“An Appeal to Heaven”) while responding to contemporary partisan and cultural polarization, particularly the perception that rural Appalachian communities are politically marginalized within more liberal statewide electorates. 

However, the U.S. constitutional requirement that both affected state legislatures and Congress consent to border changes makes the practical prospects of such realignment extremely low. Analysts in West Virginia have characterized the proposal as primarily symbolic and politically performative, raising questions about opportunity cost, governance capacity, and the use of historical symbols in modern partisan struggles. 

This paper concludes that, while the “Appeal to Heaven” movement illuminates real structural tensions—rural-urban divides, questions of self-determination, and regional identity—its likelihood of producing actual interstate boundary changes is remote under current political and legal conditions.

2. Historical and Symbolic Background

2.1 The phrase “An Appeal to Heaven”

The phrase originates in John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government, where an “appeal to heaven” denotes a last resort when no earthly authority will vindicate natural rights—essentially the right of revolution against tyrannical rule. 

Colonial American leaders, steeped in Lockean political theory, drew on this language in the 1760s–1770s, linking it to their cause against British imperial authority. 

2.2 The Pine Tree / Appeal to Heaven flag

During the American Revolution, General George Washington’s fleet used a white flag with a green pine tree and the motto “AN APPEAL TO HEAVEN,” now known as the Pine Tree Flag or Appeal to Heaven Flag. 

In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, the flag re-emerged in American public life:

It is frequently flown as a “heritage” or “Founding-era” emblem. Since around 2013 it has been adopted by some Christian nationalist and far-right movements, including elements involved in the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack, and has appeared at the homes or offices of various public officials. 

This dual character—historic Revolutionary symbol and contemporary ideological banner—makes the flag a loaded choice for any modern political project.

3. West Virginia’s Historical Context and Prior Annexation Efforts

3.1 West Virginia as a secession-born state

West Virginia itself originated in the Civil War as a partition of Virginia. Western Virginia counties, generally more Unionist and less invested in the slave economy, broke with Richmond and formed a separate state admitted to the Union in 1863. This precedent is explicitly referenced in current “Appeal to Heaven” rhetoric as evidence that rearranging state lines to reflect regional sentiment is not unprecedented. 

3.2 The 2021 western Maryland overture

In 2021, officials from three western Maryland counties—Allegany, Garrett, and Washington—floated the idea of joining West Virginia, citing cultural and political affinity. West Virginia’s governor and legislative leaders signaled receptivity, but Maryland officials and local representatives declined to pursue the idea, and the proposal stalled. 

This episode established:

A template: county-level expressions of interest, followed by a welcoming posture from Charleston. A reality check: the reluctance of Annapolis, and the absence of a serious, sustained local push, limited progress.

The 2025 “Appeal to Heaven Movement” can be seen as a broader, more explicitly ideological extension of these earlier discussions.

4. Description of the Current “Appeal to Heaven” Movement

4.1 Core actors and proposals

Key figures include:

Sen. Chris Rose (R–Monongalia, WV) – Sponsor of the “Appeal to Heaven” resolution in the West Virginia Senate, which invites conservative-leaning counties in western Virginia and Maryland to pursue joining West Virginia.  Del. S. Chris Anders (R–Berkeley, WV) – Introduced a bill providing a process for bordering counties and towns to join West Virginia via local elections; he now works alongside Rose to expand the proposal.  Outside advocacy groups – A group styling itself West Virginia Constitutional Conservatives (WVCC) promotes a petition supporting the movement, framing West Virginia as a refuge for “freedom, faith, family, and the Constitution.” 

The numeric details have shifted as the proposal evolved:

Initial lists referenced roughly 27 counties in Virginia and Maryland combined.  Later reports describe 30 to 33 counties, and some coverage notes 36 counties when additional Virginia jurisdictions are counted. 

The general pattern is consistent: the targeted jurisdictions are conservative-leaning counties contiguous with West Virginia, largely in western or Appalachian Virginia and western Maryland.

4.2 Geographic and political profile of the invited counties

The invited counties share several features emphasized by supporters:

Predominantly rural, with Appalachian cultural identification. Solid or leaning Republican voting patterns in recent statewide and national elections. Relative distance—geographically and culturally—from the political centers of Richmond and Annapolis. 

The resolution typically excludes:

More urban and suburban areas that vote Democratic (e.g., certain independent cities and outer suburbs), underscoring the political-selection logic rather than purely geographic adjacency. 

4.3 Rhetoric and use of “Appeal to Heaven” branding

Rose and allied advocates frame the movement around:

Self-determination and liberty: The tagline evokes Locke and Revolutionary self-assertion—when “government becomes destructive to liberty, [people] have the right to no longer be ruled by that government,” as Del. Anders put it.  Shared Appalachian values: Emphasis on “freedom, Second Amendment rights, economic development, and rural representation,” along with slogans such as “freedom in Appalachia” and “country roads take you home.”  The Appeal to Heaven Flag: Rose’s social media and supporter content often display the historic flag, tying the resolution to a broader narrative of resistance to perceived overreach by “distant politicians” in Annapolis and Richmond. 

At the same time, the flag’s contemporary associations with Christian nationalism and election denialism mean that its use signals more than generic Revolutionary heritage; it situates the movement in a particular ideological ecosystem. 

5. Constitutional and Legal Framework

5.1 U.S. Constitution: Article IV, Section 3

The relevant constitutional provision states that:

No new state may be formed within the jurisdiction of any other state or by junction of states or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of Congress. 

Applied to this movement, any transfer of counties from Virginia or Maryland to West Virginia would require:

Approval by the Virginia General Assembly (and governor). Approval by the Maryland General Assembly (and governor) for Maryland counties. Approval by the West Virginia Legislature and governor. Final consent by the U.S. Congress.

Rose’s own resolution is typically framed as an “invitation”—a signal that West Virginia is willing in principle—but does not, on its own, alter boundaries. 

5.2 State-level law and practical hurdles

In addition to federal requirements, state constitutions and statutes would shape the process:

Virginia: The presence of independent cities (legally distinct from counties) raises complex questions about enclaves and service delivery if surrounding counties changed states while cities did not. Commentators have noted that the resolution does not clearly address such issues.  Maryland: Previous reactions from western Maryland officials and state-level leaders in 2021 suggest limited appetite for serious annexation talks, despite occasional protest or symbolic gestures. 

Analyses from West Virginia–based media and legislators stress that the likelihood of Maryland and Virginia consenting is extremely low, given partisan control and the loss of territory, tax base, and electoral votes that such secession would entail. 

6. Political Drivers and Grievances

6.1 Rural–urban and regional representation tensions

The movement arises from long-standing tensions:

Rural western counties in both states often feel overshadowed by more populous metropolitan regions in policy priorities (transportation, education funding, environmental regulation, gun policy, etc.). Supporters argue that legislative majorities in Richmond and Annapolis “don’t share our values,” specifically citing gun rights, “radical green experiments,” education/curriculum disputes, and taxation. 

Thus, the “Appeal to Heaven” framing amplifies an existing rural-urban political grievance: that geographically peripheral regions see themselves as politically peripheral as well.

6.2 Ideological alignment with West Virginia

The movement’s advocates present West Virginia as:

A more ideologically congenial jurisdiction—socially conservative, pro–Second Amendment, skeptical of environmental regulation, and rhetorically committed to religious and traditionalist values.  An Appalachian state with cultural affinity to neighboring mountain and valley counties in Virginia and Maryland.

The petition language explicitly contrasts West Virginia’s “freedom, faith, family, and the Constitution” with what it portrays as coercive and secularizing policies in the existing states. 

6.3 Electoral considerations

If successful, annexation would:

Increase West Virginia’s population from roughly 1.8 million to perhaps 2.5–2.6 million.  Add House seats and Electoral College votes to a state currently leaning strongly Republican. Remove conservative-leaning counties from Maryland and Virginia, likely making those states more safely Democratic at the statewide level.

Supporters emphasize “giving a voice” to conservative rural communities; critics characterize the effort as partisan border engineering, using the language of self-determination to achieve durable partisan advantage. 

7. Economic, Fiscal, and Administrative Implications

7.1 Economic profile of the targeted counties

Commentary from West Virginia media notes that many of the proposed counties:

Are far from their current states’ financial and infrastructure hubs. Have limited economic output relative to their land area. Face challenges in healthcare access, transportation, and public services. 

This suggests that:

For the counties: Joining West Virginia might not necessarily bring higher spending; West Virginia already struggles with rural service provision. For West Virginia: Taking on large, rural, service-intensive areas could exacerbate fiscal strain and infrastructure demands, even if they bring added population and some tax revenue.

7.2 Impact on West Virginia’s fiscal and administrative capacity

West Virginia is among the poorer U.S. states on several metrics and already manages sprawling rural service networks. Adding multiple out-of-state counties would require:

Harmonizing tax structures and revenue systems. Integrating school districts, law enforcement, judiciary, and regulatory regimes. Reworking transportation planning and state-level agency jurisdictions.

Analysts have questioned whether the state has the bandwidth or resources to absorb such changes, especially if annexation were driven by political symbolism more than detailed planning. 

7.3 Consequences for Maryland and Virginia

For Maryland and Virginia, the loss of western counties would mean:

Reduced territory and population. Changes to their own legislative districts and possibly to congressional apportionment and Electoral College votes. Potential political simplification (more homogeneous remaining electorates) but also a precedent for disaggregating states along partisan lines.

These broader implications help explain the skepticism and resistance among Maryland and Virginia officials. 

8. Stakeholder Responses

8.1 West Virginia political elites

Responses among West Virginia leaders range from enthusiastic rhetorical support to skepticism:

Some lawmakers and governors (current and former) have framed such ideas as welcome or tongue-in-cheek invitations—“Come to West Virginia”—especially after Democratic gains in Virginia elections.  Others question whether the movement is a serious policy initiative or political theater that distracts from pressing statewide issues (economy, education, healthcare, infrastructure). 

8.2 Maryland and Virginia officials

Past and present indications:

In 2021, elected officials from Allegany, Garrett, and Washington Counties reacted skeptically or refused to advance the idea of joining West Virginia.  Current Maryland and Virginia leadership—dominated by Democrats at the state level—has shown little interest in ceding territory or legitimizing secession discussions.

8.3 Local public opinion

Empirical polling is sparse so far; most data are anecdotal:

Some residents in invited counties express cultural affinity for West Virginia or frustration with state-level policies. Online discussion (e.g., on regional subreddits) often frames the proposal as “pure theater” or a “publicity stunt,” even among West Virginians, though there is also curiosity and some local support. 

The absence of broad-based, organized local campaigns in the counties themselves—beyond petitions promoted by West Virginia-based groups—suggests that the issue remains largely elite-driven at this stage.

8.4 Civil society, media, and watchdog organizations

Because the movement uses the Appeal to Heaven flag and rhetoric tied to Christian nationalism, it intersects with wider debates:

Civil-rights and watchdog organizations have documented the flag’s contemporary use within Christian nationalist, far-right, and “Stop the Steal” contexts, raising concerns when public officials incorporate it into official communications. 

For critics, this embedding of the county-secession effort within a Christian nationalist symbolic repertoire raises questions about pluralism, minority rights, and the separation of church and state.

9. Normative and Strategic Analysis

9.1 Self-determination vs. constitutional order

The movement argues that western Virginia and Maryland counties should have a right to choose governance closer to their values, resonating with Locke’s “appeal to heaven” when earthly remedies fail. 

However, the constitutional framework:

Channels such aspirations through demanding multi-level consent rather than unilateral local decisions. Balances local self-determination with the integrity of states and national stability.

From a federalism perspective, the “Appeal to Heaven” movement thus highlights a tension: local majorities may feel trapped in statewide coalitions that do not reflect their preferences, while the constitutional system is designed to prevent frequent boundary re-drawing along partisan lines.

9.2 Rural-policy grievances vs. border engineering

Many substantive grievances—underinvestment, representation, regulatory fit—could, in principle, be addressed through:

State-level policy reforms. Regional compacts and inter-state cooperation. More targeted decentralization or tailored rural policies.

Border realignment is a maximal remedy; its practical infeasibility may divert energy away from incremental, achievable reforms, or it may function as a symbolic bargaining chip to draw attention to neglected issues.

9.3 Symbolism and the risk of escalation

By invoking revolutionary and religious imagery and aligning with the Appeal to Heaven flag, the movement risks:

Conflating constitutional processes (resolutions, petitions, legislative negotiation) with more confrontational rhetoric of divine appeal and resistance. Feeding perceptions that standard democratic processes are illegitimate, which can, in other contexts, be associated with anti-democratic or anti-institutional mobilization. 

At the same time, the movement’s proponents consistently frame their proposal as proceeding via lawful, constitutional means—legislation, referenda, and congressional consent—rather than extra-legal action.

10. Scenario Outlook

10.1 Most likely: Symbolic movement and intra-state bargaining

Given legal hurdles and political realities, the most plausible near-term outcome is that:

The “Appeal to Heaven” resolution is debated in Charleston and perhaps passed in some symbolic form. Maryland and Virginia legislatures decline to engage, or simply ignore it. The movement functions primarily as a rhetorical tool in state and regional politics, focusing attention on rural grievances.

In that scenario, the initiative may modestly influence:

How Maryland and Virginia leaders talk about their western regions. How West Virginia politicians frame their state’s identity as a “refuge” for culturally conservative Appalachians.

10.2 Possible: Local consultative processes without boundary change

A second scenario involves:

Nonbinding local referenda or advisory votes in some counties, gauging interest in changing states. Continued media attention, but no consent from Richmond, Annapolis, or Congress.

Such processes might serve as a protest mechanism, allowing rural counties to register discontent without effecting actual secession.

10.3 Low-probability: Negotiated boundary adjustment

A truly transformative scenario—formal transfer of counties—would require:

Substantial and sustained local support in multiple counties. Strategic political alignment across three states and Congress, coupled with detailed negotiations on finances, infrastructure, and representation. A national political environment tolerant of state-boundary reconfiguration.

Given current partisan dynamics and the incentives of Maryland and Virginia leadership, this scenario appears remote.

11. Conclusion

The “Appeal to Heaven” movement to invite western Virginia and western Maryland counties into West Virginia is best understood as a convergence of:

Historical Revolutionary symbolism and Lockean rhetoric. Contemporary Christian nationalist and far-right iconography around the Appeal to Heaven flag. Deep-seated rural-urban political tensions and partisan realignment in the Appalachian region. West Virginia’s own unique origin story as a state formed by county-level secession from Virginia.

As a practical policy proposal, the movement faces steep constitutional and political obstacles and would pose serious fiscal and administrative challenges even if it progressed. As a symbolic project, however, it powerfully communicates a sense of regional alienation and a desire for governance that reflects local values more closely.

For analysts, policymakers, and residents in the affected counties, the key questions going forward are:

How can genuine rural grievances be addressed within existing state structures? What are the risks and benefits of pursuing highly symbolic, low-probability boundary changes as a political strategy? How does the appropriation of historical and religious symbols shape the broader discourse about federalism, pluralism, and democratic legitimacy in the United States?

These questions will remain salient even if the current “Appeal to Heaven” initiative never moves beyond resolutions and petitions.