|
Is it really much of a pandora's box? https://prospect.org/justice/how-kamala-harris-fought-to-keep-nonviolent-prisoners-locked-up/ quote:Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), a leading candidate to be Joe Biden’s running mate, repeatedly and openly defied U.S. Supreme Court orders to reduce overcrowding in California prisons while serving as the state’s attorney general, according to legal documents reviewed by the Prospect. Working in tandem with Gov. Jerry Brown, Harris and her legal team filed motions that were condemned by judges and legal experts as obstructionist, bad-faith, and nonsensical, at one point even suggesting that the Supreme Court lacked the jurisdiction to order a reduction in California’s prison population. It's a long article, but this in particular points out where R's have used it in the past: quote:Harris’s attorney general’s office, the ruling added, “continually equivocated regarding the facts and the law,” to the point that the panel strongly considered holding the state in contempt. They rejected that action only because it would have delayed the release of nonviolent inmates even further, and aided the state’s obstructionist campaign. “This Court would therefore be within its rights to issue an order to show cause and institute contempt proceedings immediately,” the ruling reads. “Our first priority, however, is to eliminate the deprivation of constitutional liberties in the California prison system. To do so, we must first ensure a timely reduction in the prison population.” So I dunno, seems like if you're gonna ignore and slow roll it for slaves and segregation, you should be willing to do so for medical care.
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 20:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 02:54 |
|
|
Cimber posted:When one side respects customs and norms, and the other does not its not a great thing for the side that wants to remain on the moral high ground. Some hardball is expected and needed, but a win at all costs mentality can do serious long term damage to the system. Is the system worth maintaining, and if so, why?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 20:45
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:When courts rule against Republicans, typically they do indeed accept it. They come back for a new approach rather than giving up forever, but that's different. And they especially don't just ignore the courts when following procedure gets the same result.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 20:48
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:roe vs wade disagrees with you Roe vs Wade is in fact an excellent example of not just ignoring the courts. It's an example of focusing on the courts and their power for decades to achieve policy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 20:55
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:What happened to the judge in Washington who ruled that the FDA can't restrict access? How does that play into setting precedent? Yeah I'm curious about this too. Is there some kind of jurisdiction difference?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 20:57
|
|
|
Kalli posted:Is it really much of a pandora's box? Mellow Seas fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Apr 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 20:58
|
|
|
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/texas-judge-halts-fda-approval-of-abortion-pill-mifepristone This article makes it seem like the FDA could choose to continue allowing the drug so kinda sounds like Biden is just willingly choosing to follow the Trump judge's order instead of the other judge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 21:02
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:When courts rule against Republicans, typically they do indeed accept it. They come back for a new approach rather than giving up forever, but that's different. And they especially don't just ignore the courts when following procedure gets the same result. Yeah anyone who is saying this ignored the dozens of times Trump's nonsense got stopped by the courts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 21:05
|
|
|
koolkal posted:Yeah I'm curious about this too. Is there some kind of jurisdiction difference? 5th circuit is already hearing an appeal on the Texas decision, pretty much as asap as courts go. Nobody is talking about Washington because everyone agrees they made the correct call.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 21:31
|
|
|
Clarste posted:I don't understand this idea that the GOP cares about precedent. If "just ignore court rulings you don't like" was an effective tactic that the GOP would happily take without a second thought, then Roe wouldn't have been important in the first place, because the GOP would have just ignored it. Even as recently as the Trump presidency, the GOP begrudgingly obeyed court rulings that went against the administration, even when they had a government trifecta. koolkal posted:https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/texas-judge-halts-fda-approval-of-abortion-pill-mifepristone Did you mean to paste a different link? This article doesn't say anywhere that the FDA could simply choose to ignore the ruling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 21:41
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:5th circuit is already hearing an appeal on the Texas decision, pretty much as asap as courts go. Nobody is talking about Washington because everyone agrees they made the correct call. Also the Texas order was stayed for a week, so we are not yet in the cool zone where two conflicting orders are in force. And absent the Texas order, the Washington order has no practical effect
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 21:46
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:Roe vs Wade is in fact an excellent example of not just ignoring the courts. It's an example of focusing on the courts and their power for decades to achieve policy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 21:52
|
|
|
Where's the line on when we should ignore a court ruling? When they try to bring back slavery? When they try to strip away women's voting rights?quote:Yeah anyone who is saying this ignored the dozens of times Trump's nonsense got stopped by the courts. Automata 10 Pack fucked around with this message at 22:13 on Apr 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 22:11
|
|
|
The whole idea of a government is a game of Nomic, and a game of Nomic effectively ends the same way a game of Dungeons and Dragons does - the players stop bothering to meet up and follow the rules theyve constructed for themselves. Its always been apes playing calvinball. The question at the heart of this is whether the game is worth bothering. Accelerationism vs. Incrementalism 2016 set a lot of bernie libs on an accelerationist tack. The ongoing campaign of stochastic terrorism is accelerationist. There is a large, well connected network of white nationalists just waiting for an opportunity to swoop in and enqct fascism (the road to serfdom suggested fascism is bourn of failed socialist movements, exploiting reactionary forces). And the "necessity defense" for climate related direct action is a clear moral good, though i always wanna know the strategic advantage before risking arrest and imprisonment (and avoid, as best as i can, anyone that seems bloodthirsty or ecofasc)... The dems are commited to incrementalism, and the gop does their best to undermine any dem programs that might actually help in any increment. Gop are full on obstructionist, as overall party strategy. Have been since obama's election, and were during the clinton years. The fascists, having significant influence on the gop, toppled over some dominoes. I dont know why journalists dont discuss it, but trump went against the "george washington/cincinnatus" calvinball "rule", and undermined the "second (bloodless) revolution" city-on-the-hill narrative (adams, i think; first time a sitting administration handed the keys over the leadership of an opposing party). Similarly, the gop has played hardball to fill the supreme court full of hacks rather than justices. The decorum rules re: the court are grounded in having sane, wise, informed persons wearing those robes. The gop strategy is accelerationist, decaying the use value of the existing Nomic rules and structure. The dems could recognize the system as decayed and broken and diminish the significance of that branch. Or they can keep playing by the agreed upon ruleset, make an earnest effort to shore up the integrity of these institutions, or they can accelerate it all falling apart. Thing is, as it falls apart, its the underprivileged and minority populations that suffer the brunt. So yeah. Biden admin bidening.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 22:13
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:but it's a loving terrible example of "When courts rule against Republicans, typically they do indeed accept it" It's pretty much the perfect example considering they claimed it was literal murder yet still abided by it while they spent decades working to gain enough power to overturn it through the judicial process. As opposed to this order which hasn't even gone into effect yet and almost certainly never will because it will get stayed pending appeal and overturned.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 22:21
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:but it's a loving terrible example of "When courts rule against Republicans, typically they do indeed accept it" It's absolutely, 100% an example of accepting the court''s authority. There's a reason my original post explicitly said that accepting a ruling does not mean giving up on the policy goal, and that's exactly what Republicans did. In a world where Republicans disregard the courts when inconvenient, the entire 50 year saga of Roe vs. Wade to the present, and the central place it has played in right-wing politics, did not happen. Seriously, how did you point to Roe vs. Wade, of all examples in US history, and think that this made your point? Does that say that entrenched fascists will not extend to disregarding courts that rule against them? Of course not, they absolutely will once they have enough power, and we're seeing that in states where Republican supermajorities work to strip powers from courts that impair them, especially when the clock is ticking in ways that can keep them from holding power. But that's not really applicable in this case to the level of control Democrats have in federal government right now, how much they stand to gain from shooting the hostage, and how much their constituents want to live in a country with functioning legal systems vs. how much the fascists do. Especially since, as has been pointed out to exhaustion, Democrats don't even get a short-term victory in exchange for uncertain long-term costs. They get exactly what they do from going through the system.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 22:25
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:but it's a loving terrible example of "When courts rule against Republicans, typically they do indeed accept it" They accept the immediate legality of the letter, not accept the spirit or the settled nature of the case. They will work to subvert and overturn the decision but do not just ignore it. E: or did, with Roe. Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Apr 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 22:29
|
|
|
i mean they spent decades trying to get around the ruling by creating more and more byzantine laws about hospital access and planned parenthood funding etc etc etc to make abortion de facto illegal but...ok...i guess they just accepted the ruling and never tried to get around it except for the decades long conspiracy to install judges to legalize their work arounds? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 22:29
|
|
|
I think Joe Biden should do the thing that protects people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 22:34
|
|
|
Automata 10 Pack posted:I think Joe Biden should do the thing that protects people. and from what I understand, issuing a stay did so
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 22:36
|
|
|
koolkal posted:https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/texas-judge-halts-fda-approval-of-abortion-pill-mifepristone As someone else mentioned, I think you either misread or posted the wrong article. At the moment, according to the article you posted - the drug is still legal - the Biden admin has made no moves to pull it - the journalist and the experts they spoke to are waiting to see what happens in the next week That, uh, does not sound like unilaterally choosing to follow the (absurd) Texas ruling
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 22:36
|
|
|
Nashville council just gave Jones his seat back. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2023/04/10/nashville-council-justin-jones-expulsion/
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 22:49
|
|
|
When discussing Roe, I think you also have to consider the Republican lack of response to support over time of the stochastic terror campaign against clinics and providers to go along with what InsertPotPun posted where it comes to using every avenue available to shut down and prevent care, Mellow Seas posted:Not anywhere near an expert so this might be off base, but: putting forth bad faith arguments in appeals and negotiations and using other delaying tactics is unfortunate, and Harris's actions in this case were abhorrent (and also incompetent!) (Thanks for the link.) But it's not really the same thing as just going "nah" to a court decision. They had to at least pretend they were trying to comply (and, once Kamala "Peter Principle" Harris had hosed off to the Senate, they did.) I didn't intend to post it originally until I hit that point in the article where the judges wanted to hold them in contempt, but didn't because that would just allow them to delay longer. To me that's a bit beyond delaying tactics into willfully ignoring the rulings. But that's a split hair I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 22:50
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:i mean they spent decades trying to get around the ruling by creating more and more byzantine laws about hospital access and planned parenthood funding etc etc etc to make abortion de facto illegal but...ok...i guess they just accepted the ruling and never tried to get around it except for the decades long conspiracy to install judges to legalize their work arounds? The point is if they were just ignoring the ruling they wouldn't have bothered with increasingly byzantine laws, they just would've kept the simple one that Roe VS Wade said weren't an option anymore
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 22:51
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:i mean they spent decades trying to get around the ruling by creating more and more byzantine laws about hospital access and planned parenthood funding etc etc etc to make abortion de facto illegal but...ok...i guess they just accepted the ruling and never tried to get around it except for the decades long conspiracy to install judges to legalize their work arounds? Well, they at least worked within the system to get to where they are now. They didn't do a 'gently caress you, you made the ruling now lets see you enforce it because we are just going to ignore it'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 22:52
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:The point is if they were just ignoring the ruling they wouldn't have bothered with increasingly byzantine laws, they just would've kept the simple one that Roe VS Wade said weren't an option anymore Cimber posted:Well, they at least worked within the system to get to where they are now. They didn't do a 'gently caress you, you made the ruling now lets see you enforce it because we are just going to ignore it'. i think we're talking past each other as to what "compliance" in this case means. for example if texas didn't try to pass more restrictive laws, despite RvsW being law, it never would have gotten back to the supreme court right? how did texas "just accept" the l when they then turned around and passed more restrictive laws that got elevated to the situation we're in now?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 23:06
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:i mean they spent decades trying to get around the ruling by creating more and more byzantine laws about hospital access and planned parenthood funding etc etc etc to make abortion de facto illegal but...ok...i guess they just accepted the ruling and never tried to get around it except for the decades long conspiracy to install judges to legalize their work arounds? Republicans may have seen judicial rulings as a key way to coerce the public into accepting unpopular policies. The GOP actually weren’t crazy enough until now to actually kill Roe v. Wade and were perfectly happy to grift religious folks until the rapture. Republicans were afraid of committing judicial tyranny before the dominance of the court out of fear of being flicked off like a flea. Roe v. Wade isn’t an obvious act of judicial tyranny like this current ruling and they were too afraid to go own that road. Because Nixon accepted the ruling as it happened, why would a future Republican President disagree with that acceptance? And so on. But who loving cares what they think? They’re nuts. Automata 10 Pack fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Apr 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 23:11
|
|
|
In the RvW example, the type of noncompliance being discussed here would have taken the form of a state criminalizing early-term abortion and then prosecuting someone for it over a federal court's objection. No state did this. They erected ridiculous legal obstacle courses around abortion, but if you beat those hurdles and obtained one you were home free (if out a lot of time and money)
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 23:14
|
|
|
haveblue posted:In the RvW example, the type of noncompliance being discussed here would have taken the form of a state criminalizing early-term abortion and then prosecuting someone for it over a federal court's objection. No state did this. They erected ridiculous legal obstacle courses around abortion, but if you beat those hurdles and obtained one you were home free (if out a lot of time and money) to me that's enough to say texas was ignoring established law. again i think we agree on most of this stuff. i just don't think it's as settled as "they accept rulings they don't like"
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 23:28
|
|
|
Google Jeb Bush posted:As someone else mentioned, I think you either misread or posted the wrong article. At the moment, according to the article you posted I was going based off the tweet posted a page or 2 ago from the HHS spokeswoman had posted which made it seem like they were going to pull it but sounds like I misinterpreted it and there's nothing actually changing for a few days at least.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 23:37
|
|
|
InsertPotPun posted:texas passed a 6 week ban but left the "criminalizing" up to their citizens bypassing the whole "state punishment" thing in a very very obvious way. they set up the system and handed out the tools for punishment but never punished anyone themselves. this led to RvsW being overturned right? the state did criminalize abortions but outsourced the punishment. to me that's a direct non-compliance because it set up the overturn by passing laws contrary to the previous ruling. Since there seems to be some confusion, let me try reiterating it a different way. In general, Republicans want to severely restrict and/or ban abortion. However, every time they passed a state/local law that got struck down by a federal judge for being in violation of Roe v Wade, they have never raised a middle finger and said “we’re still going to enforce this law”. Of course they’re going to try to get around the law. Everyone does that with a law they disagree with. It’s a natural part of the system, since laws do (and should) have limitations. But that’s still abiding by a judge’s ruling on the previous attempt that was found in violation of said law Kalit fucked around with this message at 23:45 on Apr 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 23:40
|
|
|
yeah we're just disagreeing on to what level of rule lawyering constitutes disrespect, but we agree on the broader strokes
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2023 23:50
|
|
|
“Let’s just break the rules around judicial approval, no way that blows up in our faces.” —Harry Reid
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2023 00:12
|
|
|
AhhYes posted:Nashville council just gave Jones his seat back. I had seen this story covered by CNN I'm curious as to why they only reinstated Jones to his position. From the CNN article, he was appointed back to his position since a special election isn't for a couple of weeks. But does anyone more familiar with TN state politics as to why only one of the two ousted members were reinstated?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2023 00:15
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:“Let’s just break the rules around judicial approval, no way that blows up in our faces.” —Harry Reid Nothing would have stopped McConnell from filling every R president’s Supreme Court nomination. But it’s apples and oranges because the senate amending its own rules is not a cool zone end to the rule of law thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2023 00:16
|
|
|
Velocity Raptor posted:I had seen this story covered by CNN I'm curious as to why they only reinstated Jones to his position. From the CNN article, he was appointed back to his position since a special election isn't for a couple of weeks. But does anyone more familiar with TN state politics as to why only one of the two ousted members were reinstated? It's not the state government reinstating them; it's local governments. Different local governments that operate on different political and bureaucratic schedules. Expect both to be reinstated before too long.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2023 00:18
|
|
|
I mean whether or not the administration plans to take mifepristone off the market, there's no reason to put out a press release saying "the FDA will not comply with the order" when it's not in effect and they expect a higher court to issue a stay.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2023 00:19
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Everybody on libtwit tweeting as if Biden was actually going to violate a judge's order was pretty funny for a few days. They don't have to disregard it, they just have to obey the decision by the Washington court and let the Supreme court sort it out before making a decision.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2023 00:21
|
|
|
Clarste posted:I don't understand this idea that the GOP cares about precedent. Surprisingly Trump never did, but maybe they just never had a good opportunity?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2023 00:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 02:54 |
|
|
Velocity Raptor posted:I had seen this story covered by CNN I'm curious as to why they only reinstated Jones to his position. From the CNN article, he was appointed back to his position since a special election isn't for a couple of weeks. But does anyone more familiar with TN state politics as to why only one of the two ousted members were reinstated? AP says the other lawmaker, Justin Pearson, is expected to be reappointed when his districts commission reconvenes on Wednesday.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2023 00:36
|
|
