Support NeoGAF

[Learn2read]

and re: "states' rights"

You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”

 

[SliceSabre]

"I'mma just throw out shit that has no fucking hope of ever passing to prove I'm the best conservative!"

 

[jblank83]

So he wants to weaken every part of the government except the Senate, allowing US law to be dictated by a non-representative minority of the government (The Senate) and of the people.

 

[TAJ]

Every one of these is obviously designed to let the majority shit on minorities with impunity.
I have family who would eat this shit up, though. They've literally said, "They can't keep getting away with it! /cry" about the higher courts.

 

[Rayis]

He can fuck all the way off, keep shitty Texas politics in Texas

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

Everyone knows what the "state's rights" issue is all about. Conservatives want to be able to make their states like the ones in their fantasies. That is: fucking nutjob levels of conservative, white, Christian and straight, with no accountability upwards for any of the crazy, backwards shit they'd do to try and achieve that.

 

[Shard]

Greg Abbott isn't going to like the reality of the situation and that is fine by me.

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

Expected of the tea party nutcase the voters put in office there. It's basically a desire to return to articles of confederation style government, with no real understanding of why that didn't work in the first place. All this woudl do is screw all minorities out of civil rights or restitution, cripple any regulations (allowing unlimited pollution and robber barons, no workplace safety, etc), create 50 easily gerrymandered tinpot dictatorships/despots, and make it basically impossible to function as a nation.

 

[RPGCrazied]

Ahhh, this doesn't sound good. The things he could do that could hurt people.

And I'm a Texan, so it makes it worse.

 

[Big Blue]

I think ending lifetime terms could be a start.

As for these proposals, I don't think it is the best course of action either. You render the court system quite useless. Granted, 2/3 majority of presumably state legislatures is a pretty high test, it just doesn't seem like a good idea.

What's the percentage of low population conservative flyover states?

I disagree. The danger of allowing justices to potentially cave in to political pressure is very real if you do that.

 

[appaws]

The statements on trying to limit the Supreme Court's power frustrates me. The whole point of the Judicial branch is for there to be impartial, legal analysis of the country's laws and the Constitution. The day you allow the popular vote to override the court is the day this country is finally and truly finished.

The real problem, I think, is that it's solely a presidential duty to nominate new justices. Why isn't this a process of the bar association? The bar association should be able to determine the pool of justices from which the president can make their choice, instead of trusting that the president would nominate a justice on their legal merits alone.

Bar associations are collections of great idiots. And they would never pick based on "legal merits alone" any more than Presidents do. And there is no rule that says justices have to be lawyers. Actually, more of them should not be lawyers.

As for the proposal as a whole. It's a pipe dream of some starry-eyed so-called "conservatives" who believe the United States can somehow be saved. It is way too late for that. We are already multiple nations, and eventually we will be separate states to match.

 

[Alchemy]

Reads like a bitchfest from someone pissed off that minorities can have equal rights. If we asked the majority to vote in the best interests of minorities/women none of those groups would have the rights they do now.

 

[johnny956]

I disagree. The danger of allowing justices to potentially cave in to political pressure is very real if you do that.

We're having this exact issue in Missouri as we have term limits. They all become lobbyists immediately after and are even more cosy to our state legislatures.

 

[RustyNails]

"Convention of States to fix the cracks in our Constitution"

Is that what we're calling the Confederate States now?

 

[mr2xxx]

Texas needs to stop trying to become it's own country.

 

[Rhomega Beta]

Allow a two-thirds majority of the States to override a U.S. Supreme Court decision.

So we can overrule a judgement if we don't like it? Can we vote to send someone to jail even if a jury rules them innocent?

 

[Mathunilx]

You don't think a monotonically increasing national debt will destroy the US economy?

Not if GDP increases as a result of government spending. Pretty simple logic here.

 

[GnawtyDog]

I love that he seems to think states are like levels in a videogame, wholly self-contained within those magic borders and their actions and policies don't affect their neighbors in the slightest.

I really feel bad for my relatives in Texas having this loon as a governor.

It's not just Texas dealing with loons known as GOP governors. Ricky Scott is another nut.

 

[SapientWolf]

Reads like a bitchfest from someone pissed off that minorities can have equal rights. If we asked the majority to vote in the best interests of minorities/women none of those groups would have the rights they do now.

Yeah, I don't think they have a good argument for limiting the Supreme Court's powers until their own state's judicial system gets its act together.

 

[Slavik81]

K: Why can't we just make a law against flag-burning?
A: Because that law would be unconstitutional. But, if we changed the Constitution...
K: Then we could make all sorts of crazy laws!

5) Allow a two-thirds majority of the States to override a U.S. Supreme Court decision.
9) Allow a two-thirds majority of the States to override a federal law or regulation.

This seems really pointless. Constitutional amendments can already do those things, though they do require a three-quarters majority to ratify.

So we can overrule a judgement if we don't like it? Can we vote to send someone to jail even if a jury rules them innocent?

Yes.

 

[GoldenEye 007]

I disagree. The danger of allowing justices to potentially cave in to political pressure is very real if you do that.

Yeah I'm not too sure on this either. But I would not allow any sort of re-appointment or anything. One term and done forever. Maybe instead of a set term, a forced retirement at a certain age?

IDK, I do think it's worth looking into the indefinite appointment of SCOTUS justices.

 

[Stinkles]

The blackness of the president made people way crazier than I ever imagined. Republicans to some watching a hard reset.

 

[Steeped in a Sea of Games]

I thought republicans looked at the Constitution like it was a holy document that should never EVER be amended because we'd be stomping on our god-given precious rights.

Oh right, only when it comes to guns and the 1st amendment when it comes to someone's right to be an asshole.

 

[AntoneM]

The blackness of the president made people way crazier than I ever imagined. Republicans to some watching a hard reset.

But the chief justice of the supreme court, hon. John Roberts basically said racism just isn't a thing anymore.

 

[AntoneM]

Bar associations are collections of great idiots. And they would never pick based on "legal merits alone" any more than Presidents do. And there is no rule that says justices have to be lawyers. Actually, more of them should not be lawyers.

As for the proposal as a whole. It's a pipe dream of some starry-eyed so-called "conservatives" who believe the United States can somehow be saved. It is way too late for that. We are already multiple nations, and eventually we will be separate states to match.

Ahh yes, the people who are experts on law and jurisprudence don't know shit about law and jurisprudence. If only they had google and could become an expert like you.

 

[besada]

Dumb Texas politician talks about dumb things that are never going to happen.

We couldn't pass a constitutional amendment right now stating that the sun was bright. We've never been less close to passing any amendment, much less nine of them.

This is posturing, mixed with a little pissing in the wind.