4 ms·

> There was no legal basis for this I pointed this out in a separate comment, but there is absolutely a legal basis for this. The CDC is the Center for Disease

> There was no legal basis for this I pointed this out in a separate comment, but there is absolutely a legal basis for this. The CDC is the Center for Disease Control (emphasis on control), and so it's absolutely in their mandate to make regulations that prevent the spread of infectious diseases. > you can't run a country on what we feel is best at the time I hate to say it, but this is exactly how the country is run. "What is the best course of action?" "Put us on that course of action." Whether done with laws, orders, regulations, court mandates, etc that's exactly what we do.

themaninthedark 2y ago
The Supreme Court ruled that the CDC exceeded their authority and that it would take an act of Congress to change that: https://www.nlc.org/article/2021/08/27/what-to-know-about-the-ending-of-the-cdc-eviction-moratorium/ https://www.nlc.org/article/2021/08/27/what-to-know-about-th... The current best course of action is how we got the the Interment of the Japanese Americans and Guantanamo Bay
- falcolas 2y ago
  If SCOTUS made the ruling, then the process worked as intended, even when the Cheveron deference was part of that process. Even when written by congress, not all laws that pass will pass judicial review. > The current best course of action is how we got the the Interment of the Japanese Americans and Guantanamo Bay The best course of action is also how Boar's Head products were recalled. How we decide to fix bridges before they fall. How we keep companies from forming monopolies. How we provide aide to states hit by hurricanes and wildfires. And so on...
sickofparadox 2y ago
CDC is primarily a research and guidance organization that has only once in its history had a say over the process of evictions. To argue that because there is a major disease outbreak, therefore this unrelated government agency gets to decide who lives in a house I own is not only insulting to my intelligence, it is offensive to my sense of liberty.
- falcolas 2y ago
  You live as a part of society, your liberty is going to be offended with every step you take. You're taxed. You're required to maintain your rental properties to a certain standard. You're required to have a license to drive your vehicle. The things you buy are required to not poison you. And so forth. And let's be frank. A government agency has always had a word in the occupancy of your homes. Be it the state government or otherwise. Your property is built upon state property, after all. And, if I'm being completely honest, I have absolutely zero respect for someone who is upset they couldn't fuck someone over at a time where unemployment was so high.
  - themaninthedark 2y ago
    >You live as a part of society, your liberty is going to be offended with every step you take. You're taxed. You're required to maintain your rental properties to a certain standard. You're required to have a license to drive your vehicle. The things you buy are required to not poison you. And so forth. Right and we have robust laws passed that allow for the regulation of each of those things. And court battles were fought and laws had to be amended to get us where we are today, so i don't get all this hand wringing that is going on because we are suddenly having to follow the established political process. >And, if I'm being completely honest, I have absolutely zero respect for someone who is upset they couldn't fuck someone over at a time where unemployment was so high. I am glad that you have no problem trampling on the rights of one set of people over another set because even though you may not see it as such, landlords are people too and they were absolutely getting "fucked over" at that time. They had the same bills to pay and food to buy that everyone else had to deal with as well.
  - sickofparadox 2y ago
    >The things you buy are required to not poison you. "We have laws against poison being in food therefore it's ok if a research organization funded by the federal government denies you your property rights" is a laughably contemptible argument. It falls flat on its face the second it leaves your mouth. Just admit you agreed with the ends justifying the means and stop pretending you care about democracy or rule of law. >And, if I'm being completely honest, I have absolutely zero respect for someone who is upset they couldn't fuck someone over at a time where unemployment was so high And what if I was the one who was unemployed while my tenant kept their job while refusing to pay because they knew my rights had been stripped from me?
bigfatkitten 2y ago
And the Supreme Court correctly found that CDC had acted ultra vires. As a person, you can do whatever you like so long as there is no law prohibiting it. Government agencies are the opposite; they can only perform functions provided by legislation.

themaninthedark 2y ago

The Supreme Court ruled that the CDC exceeded their authority and that it would take an act of Congress to change that: https://www.nlc.org/article/2021/08/27/what-to-know-about-the-ending-of-the-cdc-eviction-moratorium/ https://www.nlc.org/article/2021/08/27/what-to-know-about-th... The current best course of action is how we got the the Interment of the Japanese Americans and Guantanamo Bay

falcolas 2y ago
If SCOTUS made the ruling, then the process worked as intended, even when the Cheveron deference was part of that process. Even when written by congress, not all laws that pass will pass judicial review. > The current best course of action is how we got the the Interment of the Japanese Americans and Guantanamo Bay The best course of action is also how Boar's Head products were recalled. How we decide to fix bridges before they fall. How we keep companies from forming monopolies. How we provide aide to states hit by hurricanes and wildfires. And so on...

sickofparadox 2y ago

CDC is primarily a research and guidance organization that has only once in its history had a say over the process of evictions. To argue that because there is a major disease outbreak, therefore this unrelated government agency gets to decide who lives in a house I own is not only insulting to my intelligence, it is offensive to my sense of liberty.

falcolas 2y ago
You live as a part of society, your liberty is going to be offended with every step you take. You're taxed. You're required to maintain your rental properties to a certain standard. You're required to have a license to drive your vehicle. The things you buy are required to not poison you. And so forth. And let's be frank. A government agency has always had a word in the occupancy of your homes. Be it the state government or otherwise. Your property is built upon state property, after all. And, if I'm being completely honest, I have absolutely zero respect for someone who is upset they couldn't fuck someone over at a time where unemployment was so high.
- themaninthedark 2y ago
  >You live as a part of society, your liberty is going to be offended with every step you take. You're taxed. You're required to maintain your rental properties to a certain standard. You're required to have a license to drive your vehicle. The things you buy are required to not poison you. And so forth. Right and we have robust laws passed that allow for the regulation of each of those things. And court battles were fought and laws had to be amended to get us where we are today, so i don't get all this hand wringing that is going on because we are suddenly having to follow the established political process. >And, if I'm being completely honest, I have absolutely zero respect for someone who is upset they couldn't fuck someone over at a time where unemployment was so high. I am glad that you have no problem trampling on the rights of one set of people over another set because even though you may not see it as such, landlords are people too and they were absolutely getting "fucked over" at that time. They had the same bills to pay and food to buy that everyone else had to deal with as well.
- sickofparadox 2y ago
  >The things you buy are required to not poison you. "We have laws against poison being in food therefore it's ok if a research organization funded by the federal government denies you your property rights" is a laughably contemptible argument. It falls flat on its face the second it leaves your mouth. Just admit you agreed with the ends justifying the means and stop pretending you care about democracy or rule of law. >And, if I'm being completely honest, I have absolutely zero respect for someone who is upset they couldn't fuck someone over at a time where unemployment was so high And what if I was the one who was unemployed while my tenant kept their job while refusing to pay because they knew my rights had been stripped from me?

bigfatkitten 2y ago

And the Supreme Court correctly found that CDC had acted ultra vires. As a person, you can do whatever you like so long as there is no law prohibiting it. Government agencies are the opposite; they can only perform functions provided by legislation.