A lot of people were wondering this during the later Trump years: what's to stop government officials from simply ignoring the Supreme Court (or another branch, for that matter). It's surely a "Constitutional Crisis", but many conservatives seem more interested in preaching about the Constitution than actually following it.
what's to stop government officials from simply ignoring the Supreme Court
A federal government being willing to enforce the law Reconstruction style and send in federal troops to effect the arrest of these traitors and the unconditional surrender of their government. Anything less is just giving the anti-democratic forces time to get stronger and chip away at more of our society.
A federal government being willing to enforce the law Reconstruction style and send in federal troops to effect the arrest of these traitors and the unconditional surrender of their government. Anything less is just giving the anti-democratic forces time to get stronger and chip away at more of our society.
At first I was writing a comment to say the Posse Comitatus Act wouldn't allow this, but it seems like the Insurrection Act of 1807 is an exception, and would apply in this instance.
Specifically:
10 U.S. Code § 253 - Interference with State and Federal law
The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it—
(1)so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or
(2)opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.
Edit: I feel compelled to point out that we're not here yet, because the SCOTUS order has a review process for the new voting maps, and if a judge rejects them, the judge can authorize a third party to draw the maps for Alabama. If the Alabama government rejects those third-party maps, then shit gets real.
It won't get that real. Ohio's GOP has been ordered by our state Supreme Court since before 2016 to redraw fair voting maps and not only did they not, but they submitted blatantly unfair maps that didn't even come close to their guidelines. The Court has done nothing and will continue to do nothing.
We are most certainly within a constitutional crisis. You can probably start the timeline at the 2000 Supreme Court ruling where the court said it had no authority to rule, but it did. The republicans blocking the supreme court nomination was also a clear breakdown of the system.
Republicans have been forcing a crisis so everyone gets on board with a convention so they can change the constitution.
They are getting farther & farther away from that goal with every election since 2016.
Legally? Nothing. See Worcester v. Georgia, where the apocryphal quote "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it" comes from.
Ultimately, though, if a state decides it doesn't want to follow federal law any more, that's secession, and we've fought a civil war over it before.
Just like every other part of their religion.
It's actually not a Constitutional crisis. Specifically because there's practically zero enumerated duties of SCOTUS in the Constitution.
Thank Marshall for conniving his way into actual power for the court. But it can vanish just as easily.
Just like they do with preaching a book they don't even read themselves. And only preach parts of it. And only when it's convenient for them.
I imagine the house GOP is thinking "What are you going to do about it."
guess we're at the fuck around and find out stage
Well, there are options aside from sending in troops. The article notes that there can still be challenges to these maps, and one outcome is that the court throws out the legislatures maps entirely and hires a special master.
Maybe they should hire the one they used in NY. He was so effective at making competitive districts and avoiding gerrymandering that the Democrats lost 4 House seats there, making up most of the Republican Majority this Congress. If your goal is to level the playing field, he's your man.
The thing is, there’s nothing to find out. The SC (compromised as it is) says “no, you can’t do that”. The state government is saying “cool bro imma do it anyways”. If the feds impose a new map, what happens if the state just ignores it outright? Or any other measures intended to enforce this decision?
You're right, there's not much the federal government can do to force this directly, but indirectly, they can decide where federal funding goes. and Alabama gets 41.2% of it's state revenue from federal funding.
Which is why I actually find this low-key hilarious, because if this is somehow left to stand, it implies that states who are net providers (I.e. most blue states) can simply ignore the SC.
Strategic thinking is not the GOP’s strong suit.
What are they gonna go, send in the military?
Me, a Canadian enjoying the current season of 'America™': Please???
Shit dude, I'm a US citizen and want to see that as well.
The funniest part of it is that this 100% has the potential to set up some sort of precedent for when the shoe is on the other foot. Like, if the Supreme Court orders CA to do something extremely shitty or anti-democratic, what happens if Newsom (or whoever is governor at that point) and the CA legislature just says “make me”?
Does it ever though it always seems rep do what they want, Dems don't do shit
Dems don’t ever do shit when there’s no precedent.
But when the door’s already open, it’s easier to walk through it.
California has a history of "make me."
Economically, California is (at least was, I don't know if it still is) capable of sustaining itself separated from federal money. It even has the power to set national standards, like the "known to cause cancer" warning. Which may seem like it's slapped on everything, but from what I remember, its slapped on everything containing any carcinogens, covering products even after their lifespan into disposal (if you burn a product but it doesn't destroy the carcinogen it's still a risk since it's airborne or in waste.)
Alabama is just completely fucked if they get cutoff from federal money.
I did a road trip from Los Angeles to Florida about a decade ago to help my college roommate move for med school. I recall seeing multiple billboards driving through gulf coast states saying things like
And some of the states didn’t even have the “state funding” part.
I really would enjoy seeing these states find out what happens when you fuck around with the people who are buttering your bread.
It's Alabama. They're already there.
The executive branch is the only branch with significant enforcement capabilities. If the branches revolt it will be a quick coup.
It's almost like there's something something checks and balances
I don't think folks are recognizing the amount of FAFO going on.
Ok, then I guess universities can continue with affirmative action.
💀
Well there have been a few that have said they're just gonna keep doing it. Nothing's gonna happen.
How’s that gutting of Voting Rights Act going, eh SCOTUS?
Surely the answer is "exactly as intended"?
They did this in Ohio and Wisconsin too: Apparently the GOP can straight up ignore the law, ignore rulings, and nothing happens to them.
This really shouldn't surprise anyone. Trump himself said that if minorities vote, there will never be a Republican elected again. The GOP has taken this to heart, which is why they're always trying to come up with ways to make it harder for minorities to vote, by like shortening voting times (limiting when polling stations can be open), restricting mail-in ballots, etc. So they find ways to fuck over minorities and change laws/bills to benefit Republicans.
It's funny that whenever Republicans call foul and demand recounts, it's always Republican supporters that are caught voting more than once.
The funny thing is if you go back to George Bush - they were conceivably on the path to have a permanent majority if they ever got their immigration reform plan done. Latinos y centroamericanos are overwhelmingly Catholic and to various degrees on the conservative side of things, and the Republicans threw it all away to be racist.
Do it again, General Sherman!
Seriously...how are these states still this backwards after all this time?
Because you're seeing the results of a decades long plan to brainwash their citizens into always voting against their own best interests.
It started with gutting mental health services, then they moved on to defunding education. That let them sell their people on all of the blatantly obvious lies.
You can thank Reagan for that, just like most of the other major issues with the country.
Is this the GOP’s admission that the Supreme Court is illegitimate?
What did Blacks do so badly to be targeted nonstop and mistreated?
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.