Until there are some kind of real penalties for submitting unconstitutional legislation, we will not be able to stop these clowns from abusing our state legislatures.
Seriously I’ve said it before if you’ve backed legislation found to be blatantly unconstitutional you should be removed from office.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed, advocating violence.
I’d argue that those were two separate clauses and aren’t related.
Bigots and billionaires don’t have to be a detriment to humanity
They could do positive things for society
My compost pile has plenty of room
I have space in my yard to increase the amount of compost I produce.
Those two clauses are separate statements, IMHO. A non sequitur, sure, but unrelated, nonetheless
Yeah no, you know what you meant. Don’t get cheeky about it.
Removed, unapologetic advocacy of violence.
Until you get clowns like we have in the Supreme Court shooting down women’s healthcare rights and this too becomes weaponized against the Democrats because those rights are somehow “unconstitutional”.
I say blatantly which would be different in legalese but basically, if it is directly without need for interpretation such as saying gay people cannot be teachers which is directly discriminating against sexual orientation, then you’re out. Meanwhile if it’s later found to be unconstitutional due to interpretation or implementation such as stop and frisk then you’re not removed, though any laws copying said law that was already found unconstitutional WOULD then cause you to be removed because duh we’ve been here before.
Edit: also, only said outed from office and not banned as if it’s used to remove people they could still be voted back in with a special election or whatever, similar to what happened with jones/pearson being removed using bullshit.
It really should have to pass some form of nonpartisan review before being able to be introduced. I hate that as a private citizen, I have to track possible legislation and make time during the day to tell them that it’s clearly unconstitutional, have them pass it anyways, and then wait between 2-10 years for the courts to tell them (maybe).
Informally, I believe this has been resolved by having the state attorney general sign off on most legislation as to its constitutionality. In my state, the attorney general is a shitheel. But, he has called out anti-gay legislation as blatantly unconstitutional and a waste of time and money. The lawmakers want headlines and ALEC money. They don’t give two shits about it being lawful or costly or harmful.
I’m not aware of any states where the attorney general can block introduction of legislation.
If I insinuated they could block it, that wasn’t my intention. It is basically a check without teeth. They can make a stink about it and a recommendation to the governor before signing but they have no legislative power.
some form of nonpartisan review
Putting the legislation in front of my nonpartisan review board of Federalist Society Judges, Corporate Board Members, and Silicon Valley AI machines.
I’ve been thinking along the same lines for a while. If I call 911 and submit a knowingly false report, I get charged with a crime. If I submit knowingly false paperwork to the government, I can be charged with a crime or at least infraction and fined.
But these people we elect who have entire staffs that are for making sure they always have enough information are submitting blatantly unconstitutional laws just to get them passed through a majority congress to be again and again shot down at the judicial level should really face consequences.
Though I don’t know what that would be without it being used to easily punish political opponents. If there’s a law that does this and gives the judiciary more power, how will it be used when conservatives control those 2 branches?
If I call 911 and submit a knowingly false report, I get charged with a crime.
There’s a long history of lynching and SWATing in America that suggests otherwise.
Until there are some kind of real penalties for submitting unconstitutional legislation
Who Watches The Watchmen?
Who gets to decide what constitutes “Unconstitutional Legislation” and dole out the penalties? The courts (stacked with conservatives)? The police (staffed with fascists)? The voters (caged until only the Republicans have a functional majority)?
At some level, this is a popular movement of the Elect. It isn’t just Ron going off on a limb. He’s got enormous financial and social support from other like minded white supremacists.
That’s not something you can combat without an organized opposition.
Yes, this is the danger of fascism playing with language.
They aren’t trying to be logical or fair. They aren’t here for debate. They’re here to do what they want to do, period.
Which is why they also inevitably fall apart, (eventually) they can’t even have that conversation internal to the movement and agree on what it is they want to do.
Yes, this is the danger of fascism playing with language.
It’s more than that. It’s a power dynamic.
At some point you need a large group of people in positions of power supporting a policy in order to enact it.
Even reducing this down to liberal v conservative, you’re not going to find a political body favorable to liberals when it is stacked with conservatives.
The law doesn’t restrict Satanism, this is just a comment Desantis made
Lawsuit time. BRB, gotta go donate to TST.
Is there a market to bet on the outcomes of lawsuits? Because we have a winner.
These days, I don’t even know anymore. I’ve lost all faith that’s what’s right will be what’s done
BRB, off to go buy some TST shirts and hoodies
Honestly I feel like Desantis wins either way, he loves defunding his own government over vain attempts to oppress minorities.
Ron DeSantis now judges what a religion is or isn’t?
When you’re backed by a lead-fueled delusion that you know god, you can decide anything.
He sure as shit tries but this is 100% getting litigated
He has decided…His is… Yours isn’t
In the article he says “Satan has no place in our schools” but what is Christianity without Satan?
Same as it is without…insanity
Pretty much the same, actually. The only practical difference in teachings would be “people do bad things because they are fallible and have free will” vs “people do bad things because they are fallible, have free will, and have this guy trying to pervert their sense of morality constantly.”
Of course I think most churches get their teaching on Satan from Dante’s inferno more than they do the gospel.
deleted by creator
My deeply held belief is that their is not now nor has their ever been any God in this reality, can churches please be removed from any street I drive down?
I’m cool with them having buildings, they just have to pay taxes to fund those roads because their LARPing doesn’t have any backing to justify the exemption.
They want to put a church down the block from a school, and I can’t abide that sort of thing.
deleted by creator
Imo if you pass a clearly unconstitutional law you should maybe be liable for some of the court costs.
I think you mean all
And any lawyers who advised you that it is a law that may stand up in court should be disbarred.
The ultimate arbiter of constitutionality is the Supreme Court. Given the current court, are you sure that’s what you want?
Even a law that says you have to add a rationale to the end that says “I think this is legal because…” would go a long way to fixing some of the endless stupid here.
DeSantis conveniently didn’t mention Mosque leaders as teaching the kids. I wonder why that was. Does Florida not recognize Islam as a religion? Or did he just not want to point out that was a possibility…
Does Florida not recognize Islam as a religion?
This is, unironically, an argument American conservatives are making
Or did he just not want to point out that was a possibility…
There’s two prongs to this kind of assault. The “we’re just opening the door to religion in schools” angle uses liberal egalitarianism to shoe horn in reactionary ideology. Then the “they’re too dangerous to let near your kids” angle is used to pry rival ideologies away.
What you end up with is a singular “safe” educational platform that just happens to be Ron’s favorite flavor of white supremacy, with any other belief categorized as a form of subversive or derogatory hate speech.
This is a textbook example of the “establishment of religion” prohibited by the First Amendment.
Laws for thee not for me!
It’s ironic because denying that Satan has followers would be considered blasphemy in many Christian denominations.
Florida loves dumping tax money into Miami law offices.
I’m sure this has nothing to do with the obvious federal legal rodeo they’re creating.
Sorry FloridaMan. Hey, at least you still have huge stockpiles of hydroxychloriquine! Mmmmm-mm! Good stuff.
the TST is technically a religious institute so uh. Good luck have fun.
I think the COS also is but fuck the COS the COS can eat dick.
If you’re not the proper government mandated religion, you’re not welcome in Florida.
Oooook, that’s legit not something Florida can rule on. Its in direct violation of their own state constitution.
SECTION 3. Religious freedom.—There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace or safety. No revenue of the state or any political subdivision or agency thereof shall ever be taken from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.
If belief in God is a religion the belief in their adversary ie. Satan must also be a religion. Ie. Either both are religions or neither are.
Notably there’s more evidence that by Floridas definition that Christianity isn’t a religion given its support of violent prostilyzing, child rape, and incest.
Your religion isn’t a real science.
Lol. We’ve tried this before, DeSantis. Courts side with Satan.
