3 ms·
Lots of other people commented on the fact that this could be changed, so I won't get into that – the fervor of state vs. federal debates in the US always surp
by mhd 16y ago
Lots of other people commented on the fact that this could be changed, so I won't get into that – the fervor of state vs. federal debates in the US always surprises me, and I don't want to get shot at the next time I enter Ohio…
But would you actually need to have constitutional amendments to do that? Let's say a court decides that not giving your employees leave would be abuse, wouldn't that create a de facto mandatory leave, as you could claim a precedence against contracts without such provisions?
(Not a lawyer, not American, generally too naive in these matters, so be kind…)
- Gormo 16y agoBut what would be the basis in law for the court to make such a ruling?
- mhd 16y agoI would have said existing labor laws, but that's not exactly a strong suit for the US, right? No maximum work hours per week, no paid paternal leave etc. (FLSA?)
- yummyfajitas 16y agoThe scenario you describe is what is generally referred to as "judicial activism" - judges creating law from the bench rather than simply applying the law as written. It happens rather often in the US, and is strongly criticized (in some quarters) when it does.
- chc 16y agoA court could decide that, but unless the Supreme Court entirely ceased to do its job, the ruling would probably be reversed. Judges aren't allowed to make up laws.