Punitive Federalism

[Tim2run]

Across the country, government officials are tightening and reimposing curfews, stay-at-home orders, mask mandates, and other restrictions as COVID-19 numbers climb. But with public patience over lockdowns wearing thin, many individuals and local authorities openly reject rules that drive people to poverty and despair. County sheriffs in California, New York, North Dakota, Oregon and elsewhere say they'll have nothing to do with enforcement efforts and spar with governors who resent such independence.

It's the rebellious spirit of the earlier sanctuary city and Second Amendment sanctuary movements, amplified by the pressures of the pandemic into an eruption of what some legal scholars call "punitive federalism." Get used to it, because our politically polarized era offers fresh soil for such dictates and defiance.

...

"These more recent conflicts represent more than 'uncooperative federalism,'" Richard Schragger of the University of Virginia School of Law wrote earlier this year. "What has emerged instead is something that could be called 'punitive federalism'—a regime in which the periphery disagrees with or attempts to work around the center and the center seeks to punish those who do so, not just rein them in."

But Schragger referred not to battles over pandemic lockdowns, but to conflicts between state governments imposing restrictions on firearms and self-defense rights and localities that refuse to enforce them. He saw the inspiration for such revolts in earlier resistance by sanctuary cities against federal immigration rules.

...

"What if polarization is less like a fence getting taller over time and more like an oil spill that spreads from its source to gradually taint more and more previously 'apolitical' attitudes, opinions, and preferences?" wrote Pennsylvania State University's Daniel DellaPosta in a study published in June in American Sociological Review. He points out that even lifestyle choices have taken on political overtones.

J.D. Tuccille, Reason.com




https://reason.com/2020/12/11/pande...ffer-glimpses-of-political-conflicts-to-come/

 

[Tim2run]

Exhibit A

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1512625

 

[CornusKousa]

Fuckin' A.....the fundamental divide is at an impasse.

I think the union has reached it's limits as to the number of states and people that are truly able to function together.
.

Control freaks gonna control freak and folks who don't want to follow the rules wont. Live and let live just isn't an option anymore....because mother fuckers can't mind their own god damn bidnizz. (always the fuckin' problem innit?)

So......where do we go from here???

The obvious answers are....

1) Union restructuring.....fewer bigger states with more autonomous self governance, essentially turning the USA into (13 lets say) nations who share a currency and a military, and that's pretty much it. I have a personal preference for this option.

2)a peaceful split....the left takes a chunk, presumably the left coast, and starts it's own new progressive nation. Presumably a unitary state run by simple majority democracy with unlimited and totally unchecked power, the majority gets WATEVER it wants. The rest of us carry on as the USA. Would suck but I'd be ok with this too.

3)Or...we could fight about it. I'd rather not.

 

[phrodeau]

In the words of Corey Lewandowski, womp womp.

 

[WillJ8787]

How about listening and following guidelines because they are important and come from experts in pandemics.

Why fight over or succede from the union because you don't like to wear a mask....such an argument makes people look idiotic and foolish.

Your choices above are not based in reality, what will happen...folks will keep on being asked to comply during a state of emergency. Those that flagrantly violate mandates by elected officials should actually face consequences as they put the rest of civil society at risk.

If you don't like it... petition, go to court, vote.

These are your options under this current system.

 

[naughtymind]

I think we have gone way too far off the rails in terms of unhealthy polarization. Conservative columnist George Will (among others) has stated more than once how the founding fathers envisioned just such a system of contrast, conflict, and overall inefficiency of government. The idea being that it would theoretically prevent overreach and limit the potential shift towards radicalization or tyranny. While there are distinct benefits to our governments system of checks and balances, I think along the way we have also lost sight of the need for a system that demands cooperation and compromise to function at all; by definition.

Out of the options you gave, I voted that I blame the Republicans. To be fair, I don’t blame all Republicans, and I don’t blame only Republicans; however, they really deserve the lions share of the blame in my opinion. The levels to which they have gone to consolidate powers, and to push towards a more and more extreme agenda have greatly fueled our divide, and they have deliberately used manipulative and divisive rhetoric at increasingly loud volume for several presidential cycles. That’s not helpful, but frankly I think it’s pretty hard to make the case that the GOP cares at all about the overall good of the country. A case in point, one of hundreds, was Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, and others refusing to even meet with SC nominee Garland (a moderate nominee of unquestioned qualifications) under the excuse that it was too close to an election (one that was several months away)...then turning around and rushing to confirm a highly controversial nominee at the last moment to a president who was well behind in all polls. Did they really believe that “the American people should get to decide the next Justice”? Obviously they did not!

 

[RobDownSouth]

AJ ventures out into the world each on every day clothed in his Cloak Of Perpetual Victimhood.

He thinks, therefore he am oppressed.

 

[CornusKousa]

How about listening and following guidelines because they are important and come from experts in pandemics.

How about if you want an "incase (D)'s get freaked out" clause on the Bill of Rights you get 2/3 of congress or the states to put that in there.

Because rule of law > what experts in pandemics say.

Why fight over or succede from the union because you don't like to wear a mask....such an argument makes people look idiotic and foolish.

Because being in a union with people who refuse to follow the rules of the union, is fucking stupid.

The left, several states and the SCOTUS no longer give any fucks about rule of law, why should anyone else??

I said it as soon as the SCOTUS rejected the case, the law no longer matters....time to just start doing whatever the fuck we want.

Your choices above are not based in reality, what will happen.

One is. You're right about the other two, not enough sane people in charge.

..folks will keep on being asked to comply during a state of emergency. Those that flagrantly violate mandates by elected officials should actually face consequences as they put the rest of civil society at risk.

IF it weren't a DIRECT violation of civil rights? I'd agree with you....but it is.

So don't be shocked when you when opposition fights back.

If you don't like it... petition, go to court, vote.

Why? LOL....those are non-options....elections have no rules (are meaningless) and the courts won't rule on if they have to follow the rules or not.

The rules don't matter anymore.

These are your options under this current system.

Wrong....you're leaving some out....20-30 states area bout to tell you "rules for thee but not for me" fuckers to straight up pound sand.

 

[phrodeau]

20-30 states might secede? I only count three.

 

[LukSkyFokker]

2)a peaceful split....the left takes a chunk, presumably the left coast, and starts it's own new progressive nation. Presumably a unitary state run by simple majority democracy with unlimited and totally unchecked power, the majority gets WATEVER it wants. The rest of us carry on as the USA. Would suck but I'd be ok with this too.

Spazmatic dumbasss gotta go full dumbass.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Loves "rules," except when he doesn't.

The Texas suit was rejected "for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution." You can't pick and choose Amendments.

Instead of crying and complaining that "there is no law" anymore, the obvious thing to do is go back to the drawing board and devise a lawsuit that doesn't violate Article III, if you can.

Same with all the rest of the suits your side lost (50+). All this whining and complaining simply because you didn't get what you wanted, like little infants.

If you had proof, better lawyers, better everything, maybe you would have done better in court.

but oh noooo, you're perfect, it's everyone else who is wrong for not giving you what you want.

>>reasoning powers of a 1 year old>>

How about if you want an "incase (D)'s get freaked out" clause on the Bill of Rights you get 2/3 of congress or the states to put that in there.

Because rule of law > what experts in pandemics say.



Because being in a union with people who refuse to follow the rules of the union, is fucking stupid.

The left, several states and the SCOTUS no longer give any fucks about rule of law, why should anyone else??

I said it as soon as the SCOTUS rejected the case, the law no longer matters....time to just start doing whatever the fuck we want.



One is. You're right about the other two, not enough sane people in charge.



IF it weren't a DIRECT violation of civil rights? I'd agree with you....but it is.

So don't be shocked when you when opposition fights back.



Why? LOL....those are non-options....elections have no rules (are meaningless) and the courts won't rule on if they have to follow the rules or not.

The rules don't matter anymore.



Wrong....you're leaving some out....20-30 states area bout to tell you "rules for thee but not for me" fuckers to straight up pound sand.

 

[Ranger3753]

3)Or...we could fight about it. I'd rather not.

Probably a decade or so ago (shortly after Obama took office), I suggested that we'd see another civil war before 2030, based on the trajectory I saw our politics heading even then. Sadly, I am not convinced it's going to be that long before it happens now.

 

[coati]

Fer cryin' out loud, will somebody please change AJ's and BoBo's diapers?

You should know by now that their temper tantrums always happen when they are full of shit.

And stop by the fridge and pick me up a beer on your way to the basement.

Thanks, hun, love ya!

 

[LukSkyFokker]

Fer cryin' out loud, will somebody please change AJ's and BoBo's diapers?

You should know by now that their temper tantrums always happen when they are full of shit.

And stop by the fridge and pick me up a beer on your way to the basement.

Thanks, hun, love ya!

Those two idiots will bag on Salon, etc. but Reason is a legit site. Bish, please.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I wonder if either AJ or BoBo will get the Covid vaccine?

I suspect they will, but will claim otherwise.

 

[CornusKousa]

20-30 states might secede? I only count three.

I think you underestimate the division of the USA.

Spazmatic dumbasss gotta go full dumbass.

Ohhh name calling.

Those two idiots will bag on Salon, etc. but Reason is a legit site. Bish, please.

No...just an interesting thought. Something you can't actually comment on because you lack the critical thinking skills.

Fer cryin' out loud, will somebody please change AJ's and BoBo's diapers?

You should know by now that their temper tantrums always happen when they are full of shit.

And stop by the fridge and pick me up a beer on your way to the basement.

Thanks, hun, love ya!

More ascription because that's the only thing Coati can do...lie.

I wonder if either AJ or BoBo will get the Covid vaccine?

I suspect they will, but will claim otherwise.

Sure I will, I got vaccines for fuckin' everything else, why not covid??

As long as it's "free" because I got mine naturally. So if society wants me to get extra they can pay for it.

 

[LukSkyFokker]

Ohhh name calling.

Telling people that they are unAmerican is also name-calling, dumb-dumb.

No...just an interesting thought. Something you can't actually comment on because you lack the critical thinking skills.

What interesting thought? What the fuck are you talking about? *I* lack critical thinking skills? Holy shit, kettle meet Bot the pot.

 

[WillJ8787]

How about if you want an "incase (D)'s get freaked out" clause on the Bill of Rights you get 2/3 of congress or the states to put that in there.

Because rule of law > what experts in pandemics say.



Because being in a union with people who refuse to follow the rules of the union, is fucking stupid.

The left, several states and the SCOTUS no longer give any fucks about rule of law, why should anyone else??

I said it as soon as the SCOTUS rejected the case, the law no longer matters....time to just start doing whatever the fuck we want.



One is. You're right about the other two, not enough sane people in charge.



IF it weren't a DIRECT violation of civil rights? I'd agree with you....but it is.

So don't be shocked when you when opposition fights back.



Why? LOL....those are non-options....elections have no rules (are meaningless) and the courts won't rule on if they have to follow the rules or not.

The rules don't matter anymore.



Wrong....you're leaving some out....20-30 states area bout to tell you "rules for thee but not for me" fuckers to straight up pound sand.[/QUOTE]

Chuckles... the Repubs party is doomed if this is the best representation of their supporters! Lol!

Elections have no rules(are meaningless) ....this is priceless!
I suppose this is why Trump is still you man!

 

[CornusKousa]

Elections have no rules(are meaningless) ....this is priceless!

It's also true

I suppose this is why Trump is still you man!

Who said he is??

He failed to do what he set out to do.

Largely in part to a chicken shit/clueless GOP that's little more than a DNC enabler party.

Nope, this is why I will just take advantage of all the corruption and enjoy the benefits.

Lockdowns? MOAR LOCKDOWNS!!!

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Factually wrong.

There are three Trump-appointed judges on SCOTUS and the courts are stacked with his appointees.

It is simply a factual error to complain all these court decisions can be blamed on the "GOP."

In fact, "the GOP" has done nothing but support him by not saying anything against his lawsuits, not acknowledging Biden is the winner, filing the Texas lawsuit and signing it. 3/4 of the GOP Congress and state DA's supported his SCOTUS lawsuit.

It was his own courts that said Uh, no. You can't blame that on anyone but yourselves.

Largely in part to a chicken shit/clueless GOP that's little more than a DNC enabler party.

Nope, this is why I will just take advantage of all the corruption and enjoy the benefits.

Lockdowns? MOAR LOCKDOWNS!!!

 

[CornusKousa]

Factually wrong.

There are three Trump-appointed judges on SCOTUS and the courts are stacked with his appointees.

Says I'm wrong, proceeds to state irrelevant and factually incorrect shit.

It is simply a factual error to complain all these court decisions can be blamed on the "GOP."

It's is also simply made up.

Nobody is blaming the court decisions on the "GOP".

Learn to read.

In fact, "the GOP" has done nothing but support him by not saying anything against his lawsuits, not acknowledging Biden is the winner, filing the Texas lawsuit and signing it. 3/4 of the GOP Congress and state DA's supported his SCOTUS lawsuit.

Yes, because they can read the Constitution.

It was his own courts that said Uh, no. You can't blame that on anyone but yourselves.

They didn't say that.

You don't know what you're talking about.

 

[WillJ8787]

Factually wrong.

There are three Trump-appointed judges on SCOTUS and the courts are stacked with his appointees.

It is simply a factual error to complain all these court decisions can be blamed on the "GOP."

In fact, "the GOP" has done nothing but support him by not saying anything against his lawsuits, not acknowledging Biden is the winner, filing the Texas lawsuit and signing it. 3/4 of the GOP Congress and state DA's supported his SCOTUS lawsuit.

It was his own courts that said Uh, no. You can't blame that on anyone but yourselves.

I am checking the Wisconsin news often for a batshit crazy half Korean arrest. It's coming soon.

 

[CornusKousa]

I am checking the Wisconsin news often for a batshit crazy half Korean arrest. It's coming soon.

LOL....sure!!!

I don't live in Wisconsin though.

 

[YDB95]

But with public patience over lockdowns wearing thin, many individuals and local authorities openly reject rules that drive people to poverty and despair.

Not if Bitch McConnell would stop blocking any and all aid. But who am I to object to right-wing populism when it's been so remarkably effective in marketing the Republicans as the exact opposite of what they really are?

 

[Lazaran]

.
Yeah, Creeping Charlie doesn't live in Wisconsin..... Just like Kyle Rittenhouse.....