3 ms·

Justice Dept has already filed suit: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-internet-california/u-s-sues-after-california-governor-signs-net-neutrality-law-idUS

Justice Dept has already filed suit: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-internet-california/u-s-sues-after-california-governor-signs-net-neutrality-law-idUSKCN1MB13E https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-internet-california/u...

duxup 8y ago
It's all "states rights" ... to do things we want them to do. After that ... no states rights.
- tjr225 8y ago
  Ironic that liberal states such as California and Washington fight the hardest for states rights and are then criticized by conservatives(even in their own states!) for doing so.
  - smsm42 8y ago
    They don't fight for states rights, they fight for right of California and Washington to enact legislation that California and Washington wants. They couldn't care less if Virginia or Alabama don't get the legislation they want.
    - tjr225 8y ago
      What better way to fight for states rights than to fight for the rights of the states that, you know, you govern?
      - smsm42 8y ago
        There's a big difference between "I fight for my right to do what I want" and "I fight for everybody's rights to do what they want, even if I don't like it". Like saying "I should have freedom of speech" and "everybody, even people I hate, should have freedom of speech". Almost nobody objects to the former, but the latter is trickier.
- dfee 8y ago
  This narrative is bad, as it reflects both a misunderstanding of the Republican perspective and a misunderstanding of the federal system at work in the US; each undermining your likely well intentioned concerns about the overturning of federal NN regulations.
  - Royalaid 8y ago
    Instead of just saying wrong, say why this opinion is wrong. Otherwise you come as smug and looking down or manipulative and trying to steer the conversation.
  - arcticbull 8y ago
    Indeed, I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. I'm also of the opinion Republicans tend to champion states' rights only when they agree with the expected result. For instance, you'd think states' rights advocates would be in favor of eliminating the federal marijuana criminalization and leaving that up to states to decide (as they have already been doing in spite). And yet Republicans insist this is the sole domain of the federal government. Whereas when it comes to abortion, it's states' rights all the way down. As for NN? I've definitely heard the Republicans citing overreach wrt. to NN (although that might be solely within the FCC?), and yet when states try to regulate, it's the FCC domain again. My personal opinion is that this should be the sole jurisdiction of the FCC as the internet is the very definition of interstate commerce and as such wholly the domain of the federal government. While it should be up to the FCC, the leadership is willfully disinterested in doing its job, as much of the Trump administration is, effectively forcing the hand of the states.

duxup 8y ago

It's all "states rights" ... to do things we want them to do. After that ... no states rights.

tjr225 8y ago
Ironic that liberal states such as California and Washington fight the hardest for states rights and are then criticized by conservatives(even in their own states!) for doing so.
- smsm42 8y ago
  They don't fight for states rights, they fight for right of California and Washington to enact legislation that California and Washington wants. They couldn't care less if Virginia or Alabama don't get the legislation they want.
  - tjr225 8y ago
    What better way to fight for states rights than to fight for the rights of the states that, you know, you govern?
    - smsm42 8y ago
      There's a big difference between "I fight for my right to do what I want" and "I fight for everybody's rights to do what they want, even if I don't like it". Like saying "I should have freedom of speech" and "everybody, even people I hate, should have freedom of speech". Almost nobody objects to the former, but the latter is trickier.
dfee 8y ago
This narrative is bad, as it reflects both a misunderstanding of the Republican perspective and a misunderstanding of the federal system at work in the US; each undermining your likely well intentioned concerns about the overturning of federal NN regulations.
- Royalaid 8y ago
  Instead of just saying wrong, say why this opinion is wrong. Otherwise you come as smug and looking down or manipulative and trying to steer the conversation.
- arcticbull 8y ago
  Indeed, I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. I'm also of the opinion Republicans tend to champion states' rights only when they agree with the expected result. For instance, you'd think states' rights advocates would be in favor of eliminating the federal marijuana criminalization and leaving that up to states to decide (as they have already been doing in spite). And yet Republicans insist this is the sole domain of the federal government. Whereas when it comes to abortion, it's states' rights all the way down. As for NN? I've definitely heard the Republicans citing overreach wrt. to NN (although that might be solely within the FCC?), and yet when states try to regulate, it's the FCC domain again. My personal opinion is that this should be the sole jurisdiction of the FCC as the internet is the very definition of interstate commerce and as such wholly the domain of the federal government. While it should be up to the FCC, the leadership is willfully disinterested in doing its job, as much of the Trump administration is, effectively forcing the hand of the states.