Will be overruled by national ban next year.
this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
707 points (98.5% liked)
News
23627 readers
2543 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 right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
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.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
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
Uncomfortable? People are going to die macniel.
Yes, very uncomfortable.
Already have been. It'll just get worse now.
Tell that to the states that have legalized recreational marijuana, while marijuana is still a federally Class 1 controlled substance
Selective enforcement is not something we should aim for.
Why not, in this reality we live in? Not in the ideal make-believe reality, in the current reality. Why shouldn't we aim for it, especially when it comes to this, knowing that all three branches of the federal government are going to go a particular way? Even if it sets a bad precedence, screw it. Save lives now, rather than chase an ideal.
Because it's already being used to oppress minorities.
So what you're saying is, if there new federal government says to round up the Hispanics, Muslims, gays and trans people and put them in camps, States should comply, because there shouldn't be exceptions?
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
Damn but thanks again :)
This was a massive debate for the first decades of the country.
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.
Oh no, we definitely follow federal law. Marijuana possession is 100% illegal here and anyone who smokes pot should know they are very naughty! We just don't allow cops to do anything about it.
Sort of, yes. Your example, as passed as a state law, would bind state officers, but not federal officers.
And in fact, New Hampshire passed a law barring state officers from enforcing federal firearms law. If the feds want to be more restrictive than the state, they'll have to do that work themselves. https://newhampshirebulletin.com/briefs/sununu-signs-bill-barring-state-enforcement-of-federal-firearms-laws/
As long as the Supreme Court agrees that that is restrictive, sure.
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.
Same thought when I read about Missouri voting for access to abortion, and for Republicans.
I'm just so dumbfounded by how many progressive constitutional amendments got passed but voted Republican.
I just can't comprehend someone saying, "You know, this asshole took away my abortion rights but since I'm voting to restore them, I guess he should get another shot."
These people think that abortion amendments are going to hold when their dear leader is in the White House.
Americans are morons. That's it.
Apparently Trump's numbers are same compared to 2020 but something like 14 million Biden voters chose to stay home than vote for Harris.
Absolute fuckwits.
Edit: Trump lost 3 million voters compared to 2020.
democrats were warned during biden's campaign in 2020 they (the left) wouldn't do it again for them. and you're surprised that they followed through when presented with a genocidal candidate? :shocked pikachu:
I mean, yes, I am surprised that they sat on their asses and tacitly chose the even more genocidal candidate.
I get not wanting to make the choice between eating dirt or wet shit, but sitting this one out was just asking for wet shit.
You were warned. You decided to hold your nose and believe the polls that everything was close and would be okay if you just high handed brow beat people enough.
You are as much to blame as Harris' campaign because you're comfortable with supporting a genicide. Please go touch grass, do some shrooms, whatever you need to do to connect with your community.
You gave Harris and biden permission to behave this way and you caused this just as much as they did.
It's already delusional to think you helped by not voting, but I'm not gonna listen to a dipshit who's just gonna sit on their ass and blame anyone who actually tried to protect the rights of queer communities. Fuck off.
yawn yet here you are. And I did vote. Sadly i must waste my time educating you dweebs who gladly support genocidal monsters across the board.
Want to win? You should have shut your mouths over lesser evil nonsense and told harris to fuck off with the genocide nonsense. Maybe the democrats would have won. At least the news cycles wouldn't have been a never ending stream of 'harris shits on her base'
Since when is Trump DNC candidate?
load more comments
(5 replies)
fuck, dude
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.