Will be overruled by national ban next year.
this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
705 points (98.4% liked)
News
36647 readers
2243 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
just like that? the governors don't have a say in that?
Nope. Federal law is solely up to Congress to make it and the President to sign it (and the Supreme Court to review if someone sues). Governors only affect state law, and federal law supercedes state law.
whelp and Congress, President and SCOTUS being in the hands of Republicans... this gonna get very uncomfortable
load more comments
(5 replies)
States' rights are only valid as long as they support the Republican agenda...
The civil war was about states' rights
States' rights to force other states to return escaped slaves. Slaves were taking the underground railroad to the north where slavery wasn't enforced. The South responded by demanding the North return the escaped slaves.
The civil war was about bullying left wing states into violating their own laws to conform to what conservative states demanded of them.
Others have answered, but the reason why "states' rights" don't matter at the Federal level is the Supremacy Clause. States can be more restrictive than the Federal government, but cannot be more lax/loose. An interesting aside is the states that have legalized marijuana usage, where the Federal government has (as of yet) not cracked down on that. It is within constitutional power to do so, but just hasn't.
woah, thanks for the lesson.
Perhaps a federation would be more suited for America instead of one government that decides for all even though every state has its own set of problems?
That's how it was designed. The federal government was supposed to be a weak organization only to organize between states and other countries. In practice, the federal government gradually increased its own power, culminating in the Supreme Court affirming it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn
load more comments
(1 replies)
Can't you game that law by just phrasing permissive laws as strict?
"It is illegal for any officer of the law to make arrest or conviction based on marijuana consumption or possession".
Boom. You're being more restrictive, not being more loose.
Lawyers hate this one weird trick! That wouldn't work because you're not actually being more "strict", you're still in opposition to the federal law. Being more "strict" means you're still in compliance with federal law, you just do extra stuff on top. Semantics can't change that.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
But states rights!!!!!!!!! /s
While voting for this, I was shocked that the ban on gay marriage passed on 2006. Reminded me that even though we've had some shithead leaders over the years, at least we're making some progress.
California passed Proposition 8 (one man one woman)in 2008! Thankfully we saw sense, and this time we passed Prop 3 (the right to marry is a fundamental right/ equal protection).
We may be a little screwy about the number line, but hopefully we're still a bastion of humanity.
Well, give it a few months, trump will remove it all.
That was just 3 years after homosexuality was legalized. They were still reacting from Lawrence v TX and prepping for the push for marriage Equality.
Well that's nice.
Until a federal ban.
Yup. Back we go.
That's why we're out of here ASAP.
Edit: Are queerphobes downvoting me or something? Sorry, I'm not going to stick around and watch my daughter get marched into a conversion therapy camp.
You know what? I can’t blame you. I just had my world view that most people are kind beings ripped from me. I plan on sinking with the ship and doing anything i can like a good sailor.
If I didn't have someone who depends on me 100%, I might stay. But she is my number one priority.
I always tell people who are reluctant to cut off narcissistic parents: you owe your parents nothing. You didn't ask to exist. They owe you everything.
Good luck, and god speed.
Thank you.
May you, your daughter and your peeps all thrive at this unexpected change. I hope you keep posting.
load more comments
(1 replies)
people are kind beings ripped from me
Covid was a big sobering moment for me as it materialized everything I read in history. I'm done with giving anyone the benefit of the doubt. People are fucking stupid and I can't be trusted.
load more comments
(1 replies)
In regards to your edit, I guess your name has some gravitas now and people will just downvote whatever you say in regards to those topics.
The question is: where? The US isn't perfect, but not many countries are. Is there still a country out there that's free and open to all?
Where for me is the UK, where I am also a citizen. No, it is nowhere near perfect. They also don't have a government that's going to force my daughter into a conversion camp. If that happens one day? Well, we'll have to cross that bridge when we come to it. She'll be much safer there for now than she is here.
Article didn't say - how much did it pass by?
Looked it up myself - they're still counting votes but as of now 63.8% of voters supported it.
fuck, dude
view more: next ›