this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2023
675 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19145 readers
2159 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 113 points 1 year ago (6 children)

How the frick is this legal?

[–] [email protected] 117 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When fascists take power, everything they do is legal.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

But we still have courts in this country.

[–] RvTV95XBeo 75 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, but it's a state matter ruled on by state judges. Who do you think appointed the state judges?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Surely some federal labor law could cover it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Labor law? As far as the feds are concerned, you can be fired for your political opinions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Imagine thinking the feds enforce labor laws

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago

Lol the courts that the fascists have been filling with other fascists to say that fascism is legal?

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago

When they've been stacked with Federalist Society judges, are they courts, or are they "courts"?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

The poor people are still mostly have to abide by the court system.

[–] [email protected] 81 points 1 year ago (3 children)

From a CNN article:

The Florida constitution allows a governor to remove an elected official for “malfeasance, misfeasance, neglect of duty, habitual drunkenness, incompetence, or permanent inability to perform official duties.” No previous Florida executive has interpreted that power as broadly as DeSantis. The state Senate can reinstate Worrell, but the chamber is controlled by Republicans closely aligned with DeSantis and have rarely stood in his way.

Warren’s attempts at reinstatement have failed. A federal judge ruled DeSantis had acted unconstitutionally in suspending Warren, writing that there was “not a hint of misconduct by Mr. Warren” in the trial record, but he ultimately dismissed the case saying he did not have the power to intervene on a state matter. The state Supreme Court tossed Warren’s lawsuit in state court earlier this summer.

Monique Worrell was the attorney recently dismissed and Andrew Warren is the one who was dismissed last year.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Things like this always make me wonder if a state could legally turn into a dictatorship.

Could Florida legally change it's constitution to say "All governing power rests entirely in Ron DeSantis" and dissolve it's representative bodies? Obviously it would still be beholden to voters for national elections (representatives and senators), but statewide there could be nothing.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Technically, no. The Constitution says "the United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government," but "republican" has historically been very loosely interpreted. Technically, China and North Korea are both republics.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

They're not technically republics, they're nominally republics.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

Well part of the problem is that there isn't total agreement on what a republic is. By some definitions it's basically anything that isn't a monarchy. Some medieval republics didn't have elections and instead chose their officials by sortition, which is essentially a lottery. China and North Korea do have elections, but they're total shams (and North Korea is basically a monarchy is a thin coat of republican paint, since by law they can't have any leader that isn't descended from Kim Il Sung).

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

According to Putin, from the Russian republic, there's no need to hold elections if you know what the likely result will be.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Possibly. The problem is that the founders decided to bake in armed revolt as a safe guard instead if, you know, reasonable solutions.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago

The state Supreme Court tossed Warren’s lawsuit in state court earlier this summer.

Why the fuck? You know, besides the fascism...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Thank you for providing an actual answer!

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago

More importantly, who is going to stop them?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

It's not...but unless someone actually stands up to him, it's just another crime our politicians get away with.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Rubber-stamp legislature that will refuse to hear any complaints.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

He will make it legal. (prequel reference, had to do it!)