3 ms·

The laws and procedures the court is undoing here were all adopted through the defined legislative process, and could have been adjusted through the defined leg

The laws and procedures the court is undoing here were all adopted through the defined legislative process, and could have been adjusted through the defined legislative process if voters’ representatives wanted that done. These court rulings will just limit Congress’s power to execute the will of the voters.

nradov 3y ago
It is far more important to operate within Constitutional limits than to execute the will of the voters. We shouldn't allow the tyranny of the majority.
- error_logic 3y ago
  It is most important for the regulations and enforcement to be implemented with a focus on constructive win-win interactions. Whether older constitutional interpretations or more centralized ones do that more effectively is ultimately determined by government officials and their incentives.
- taylodl 3y ago
  So you propose tyranny of the minority instead?
  - nradov 3y ago
    I propose following the Constitution strictly as written with a very narrow interpretation. And if some people think the federal government needs more power then they are welcome to propose an amendment.
    - taylodl 3y ago
      > I propose following the Constitution strictly as written with a very narrow interpretation. We already do, within the framework set forth by the Constitution > And if some people think the federal government needs more power then they are welcome to propose an amendment. That's been done, too. Seems like you're happy with things and maybe you just enjoy complaining?
      - nradov 3y ago
        I am not at all happy with the overly broad interpretation of the Commerce Clause which started with NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. 1 (1937). This essentially gave the federal government a loophole to exercise authority over almost everything based on only the most tenuous connections to interstate commerce. Hopefully the Supreme Court will reverse that and similar decisions in a future case, thereby limiting federal power. I will continue complaining until that happens.
- matthewdgreen 3y ago
  This is less compelling when the "Constitutional limits" are made up.

nradov 3y ago

It is far more important to operate within Constitutional limits than to execute the will of the voters. We shouldn't allow the tyranny of the majority.

error_logic 3y ago
It is most important for the regulations and enforcement to be implemented with a focus on constructive win-win interactions. Whether older constitutional interpretations or more centralized ones do that more effectively is ultimately determined by government officials and their incentives.
taylodl 3y ago
So you propose tyranny of the minority instead?
- nradov 3y ago
  I propose following the Constitution strictly as written with a very narrow interpretation. And if some people think the federal government needs more power then they are welcome to propose an amendment.
  - taylodl 3y ago
    > I propose following the Constitution strictly as written with a very narrow interpretation. We already do, within the framework set forth by the Constitution > And if some people think the federal government needs more power then they are welcome to propose an amendment. That's been done, too. Seems like you're happy with things and maybe you just enjoy complaining?
    - nradov 3y ago
      I am not at all happy with the overly broad interpretation of the Commerce Clause which started with NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 301 U.S. 1 (1937). This essentially gave the federal government a loophole to exercise authority over almost everything based on only the most tenuous connections to interstate commerce. Hopefully the Supreme Court will reverse that and similar decisions in a future case, thereby limiting federal power. I will continue complaining until that happens.
matthewdgreen 3y ago
This is less compelling when the "Constitutional limits" are made up.