3 ms·

All governments are bound by existing law until it is changed. The alternative is tyranny. The usual limit on binding future legislatures is that you can't pa

All governments are bound by existing law until it is changed. The alternative is tyranny. The usual limit on binding future legislatures is that you can't pass a law that is impossible to repeal. Courts don't step in. Complainants bring cases. Who is going to sue the government (at vast expense) over defence spending?

pyuser583 5y ago
Defense contractors. And in the US (and I’m pretty sure in the UK/Westminster countries) a goal set by a previous legislature doesn’t force the hand of a future one. There’s a distinction made between constitutional issues (what some counties call Basic Law) and normal legislation. Basic/Constitutional law constrains governments preventing tyranny. Is climate change part of Germany’s basic law?
- ectopod 5y ago
  Sure, defence contractors could do that, but suing your customers isn't such a great idea. These climate policies are not merely goals. They are laws, and they remain in force until they are repealed. It doesn't matter what kind of law they are. Do you believe that all non-constitutional law is automatically repealed when a new government takes over?
  - pyuser583 5y ago
    The law can’t bind a future legislature to act. Whether it is repealed when a new government takes over is neither here nor there. Binding future legislature takes power away from the future and gives it to the present. This is a great example -previously a legislature could change climate laws depending on the level of political support. Now, they must enact climate laws or repeal another law. That sounds fine first - but, what happens when they don’t have enough support to meet the goal, but also not enough support to repeal the goal? That’s exactly this situation. Legislatures have the right to act. When the legislature chooses not to act, they are drawing on the same authority as when they act. Other countries probably do things in different ways. In open to hearing why some systems allow legislators bind future legislatures, and how it relates to the overall system of government.
    - ectopod 5y ago
      I don't think that a law that can be repealed is binding the legislature. You think it is. We will have to agree to differ. Edited to add: for all I know, in the legal traditions of our respective countries we may both be right.

pyuser583 5y ago

Defense contractors. And in the US (and I’m pretty sure in the UK/Westminster countries) a goal set by a previous legislature doesn’t force the hand of a future one. There’s a distinction made between constitutional issues (what some counties call Basic Law) and normal legislation. Basic/Constitutional law constrains governments preventing tyranny. Is climate change part of Germany’s basic law?

ectopod 5y ago
Sure, defence contractors could do that, but suing your customers isn't such a great idea. These climate policies are not merely goals. They are laws, and they remain in force until they are repealed. It doesn't matter what kind of law they are. Do you believe that all non-constitutional law is automatically repealed when a new government takes over?
- pyuser583 5y ago
  The law can’t bind a future legislature to act. Whether it is repealed when a new government takes over is neither here nor there. Binding future legislature takes power away from the future and gives it to the present. This is a great example -previously a legislature could change climate laws depending on the level of political support. Now, they must enact climate laws or repeal another law. That sounds fine first - but, what happens when they don’t have enough support to meet the goal, but also not enough support to repeal the goal? That’s exactly this situation. Legislatures have the right to act. When the legislature chooses not to act, they are drawing on the same authority as when they act. Other countries probably do things in different ways. In open to hearing why some systems allow legislators bind future legislatures, and how it relates to the overall system of government.
  - ectopod 5y ago
    I don't think that a law that can be repealed is binding the legislature. You think it is. We will have to agree to differ. Edited to add: for all I know, in the legal traditions of our respective countries we may both be right.