3 ms·
> then go through the proper channels, and make a law explicitly banning it don't try to get private companies to do the work of enforcing arbitary rules. I th
by xg15 4y ago
> then go through the proper channels, and make a law explicitly banning it don't try to get private companies to do the work of enforcing arbitary rules.
I think one of the effects of the gridlock in US politics is that more and more actual policy is now implemented by circumventing the "normal" lawmaking process: e.g. through executive orders, court decisions or appeals to private companies or citizens.
Whichever side you're on, this can't be a good thing for a democracy.
- dragonwriter 4y agoEnforcement of social norms through convincing private actors to behave in certain ways in preference to government actions is a major point of the First Amendment, not a circumvention of the normal lawmaking process.
- zzo38computer 4y agoIt would be OK, if they did not then try to force everyone to use the services of private actors.
- stevefan1999 4y agoNo, its not okay either. You basically made a cartel that follows a government like structure
- xg15 4y agoIf you interpret the first amendment like this, then you shouldn't have any problems with Stripe's behaviour from the article either, right?