3 ms·

I'm for legalization of marijuana but think that's a terrible idea. This effectively makes one person the arbiter of law.

jessaustin 6y ago
Most USA residents support marijuana legalization, and that has been the case for over a decade.
x86_64Ubuntu 6y ago
If you have laws that are passed with racial control in mind, such as our drug laws, then mass pardoning is an act of justice and not someone becoming the arbiter of law.
- jshevek 6y ago
  > If [criteria], then mass pardoning is an act of justice and not someone becoming the arbiter of law. I dont understand your comment. Are you thinking that acts of justice, by definition, cannot also be the product of a person becoming an arbiter of law? That you perceive a decision as just doesn't change whether a person might or might not be acting as an arbiter of law.
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  Consider the alternative: a president who announces they will blanket pardon all white people and no one else.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    That’s…not the alternative. I mean, I suppose its one of a near-infinite number of possible alternatives, but I don’t see how its an even relevant one. The discussion wasn’t about someone pardoning only black people, it was about pardoning all people convicted under a particular set of laws.
    - joshuamorton 6y ago
      Right, but the point gp made was that large scale blanket pardons make a single individual the arbiter of law. That's true. (if you want a less charged example, instead imagine the president pardons everyone convicted on fraud charges). That power can then be used justly or unjustly. The constitutional balance for this is impeachment, but it's not clear that would work in practice or theory.
    - jshevek 6y ago
      I read the statement as "consider an alternative" or "consider this alternative". With this reading, the line of reasoning implied is correct and relevant. Typos happen (and this is an international community including people unfamiliar with some idioms). Obviously the alternative presented isn't THE alternative.
ortusdux 6y ago
I'm not necessarily advocating one way or another, just using an example to address the claim that while "The pardon doesn't do anything to address systemic problems in the justice system", it could.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> I’m for legalization of marijuana but think that’s a terrible idea. This effectively makes one person the arbiter of law. No, the Constitutional pardon power (in one direction, for criminal law only) does that already. The question is about how that position of arbiter will be used, not whether the President has it.

jessaustin 6y ago

Most USA residents support marijuana legalization, and that has been the case for over a decade.

x86_64Ubuntu 6y ago

If you have laws that are passed with racial control in mind, such as our drug laws, then mass pardoning is an act of justice and not someone becoming the arbiter of law.

jshevek 6y ago
> If [criteria], then mass pardoning is an act of justice and not someone becoming the arbiter of law. I dont understand your comment. Are you thinking that acts of justice, by definition, cannot also be the product of a person becoming an arbiter of law? That you perceive a decision as just doesn't change whether a person might or might not be acting as an arbiter of law.
joshuamorton 6y ago
Consider the alternative: a president who announces they will blanket pardon all white people and no one else.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  That’s…not the alternative. I mean, I suppose its one of a near-infinite number of possible alternatives, but I don’t see how its an even relevant one. The discussion wasn’t about someone pardoning only black people, it was about pardoning all people convicted under a particular set of laws.
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    Right, but the point gp made was that large scale blanket pardons make a single individual the arbiter of law. That's true. (if you want a less charged example, instead imagine the president pardons everyone convicted on fraud charges). That power can then be used justly or unjustly. The constitutional balance for this is impeachment, but it's not clear that would work in practice or theory.
  - jshevek 6y ago
    I read the statement as "consider an alternative" or "consider this alternative". With this reading, the line of reasoning implied is correct and relevant. Typos happen (and this is an international community including people unfamiliar with some idioms). Obviously the alternative presented isn't THE alternative.

ortusdux 6y ago

I'm not necessarily advocating one way or another, just using an example to address the claim that while "The pardon doesn't do anything to address systemic problems in the justice system", it could.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> I’m for legalization of marijuana but think that’s a terrible idea. This effectively makes one person the arbiter of law. No, the Constitutional pardon power (in one direction, for criminal law only) does that already. The question is about how that position of arbiter will be used, not whether the President has it.