4 ms·

The ABA supports the rule of law

71 points by cmurf 2y ago

EfficientDude 2y ago
[flagged]
softwaredoug 2y ago
I'm reminded of this saying: Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progressives/#comment-729288 https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progre...
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
SiempreViernes 2y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
baggy_trough 2y ago
[flagged]
- frankfrank13 2y ago
  like what?
  - baggy_trough 2y ago
    For example, Obama's decision to nullify immigration law as it applied to "dreamers" via selective enforcement, in violation of the constitution's take care clause.
    - mcphage 2y ago
      > For example, Obama's decision to nullify immigration law as it applied to "dreamers" And you support this, I’m assuming?
      - baggy_trough 2y ago
        Why would you assume that?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
zfg 2y ago
The vice president sure doesn't: https://www.newsweek.com/jd-vance-comment-questioning-court-authority-sparks-backlash-2028651 https://www.newsweek.com/jd-vance-comment-questioning-court-... https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gx3j5k63xo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gx3j5k63xo This isn't a new idea for J.D. Vance. He was saying the same thing 3 years ago: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/inside-the-new-right-where-peter-thiel-is-placing-his-biggest-bets https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/inside-the-new-right... The philosophy behind this thinking comes from Curtis Yarvin. He believes American democracy is a failed project and it should be replaced with an American monarchy: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23373795/curtis-yarvin-neoreaction-redpill-moldbug https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23373795/curtis-yarv... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin America fought a war of independence to rid itself of monarchy. Yarvin and Vance want to bring it back.
- jaybrendansmith 2y ago
  These people are treasonous. Yes, I said it, and I will keep saying it. If you don't believe in the rule of law, get thee to some other country, you don't belong in this one.
- legitster 2y ago
  > Vice-president JD Vance has cited Yarvin as an influence, saying in 2021, "So there's this guy Curtis Yarvin who has written about these things," which included "Retire All Government Employees," or RAGE, written in 2012. Vance said that if Trump became president again, "I think what Trump should do, if I was giving him one piece of advice: Fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state, and replace them with our people. And when the courts stop you, stand before the country and say, 'The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.'
mminer237 2y ago
While I wholly agree with the premise, I feel the ABA has lost much of its authority as it has become an extremely partisan group. Its leaders donate lots of money to Democrat candidates, its criticisms—while often valid—are entirely one-sided, and recently the ABA has been sued for illegal "reverse" racial discrimination. As an attorney, I will say I don't know any fellow attorneys who are currently members of the ABA who are right of center.
- pentel-0_5 2y ago
  The language of rationalizing fascism.
- jaybrendansmith 2y ago
  Ad-hominem and irrelevant to the facts. As you say, the premise is still spot-on here.
- mcphage 2y ago
  > its criticisms—while often valid—are entirely one-sided If the criticisms are valid but one sided, then is it a problem with the ABA, or is that the two sides aren’t equivalent?
  - toast0 2y ago
    Not enough information. The ABA may choose not to issue criticism of the other side, even though their would be valid criticism available. Or the other side might not do anything the ABA could object to.
- legitster 2y ago
  This logic is infuriating. One party is blatantly opposed to courts and legality and law. The idea that the ABA should be obligated to be non-partisan against their interests makes no sense. Nobody "owes" both sides anything. This logic would also not make sense if leveled at the NRA, farm groups, etc - or any other group with a partisan lean. If one side is just plain wrong - they are not owed 50/50 representation. And accusing them of "reverse discrimination" is ironic if you are also going to criticize them for not forcing inclusion of a political party. To put it another way: if the American Marxist Party was to suddenly become an important party, would the ABA gain authority by catering to them? In the name of non-partisanship? It makes no sense to me.
valbaca 2y ago
We've gone from "unprecendented times" to "constitutional crisis" to now. The canaries are wheezing and our country is in the midst of a full-on coup. ...but I gotta put together this microservices design because that matters I guess. We all know humanity won't last another 100 years and it seems like our government (as a representational, constitutional, democratic-republic) probably won't last another 100 days.
nonchalantsui 2y ago
It's been interesting to see the largest constitutional crisis the US has seen in 50+ years intersecting with massive social media operations. Turns out, all Richard Nixon had to do was call the constitution "woke".
keernan 2y ago
As a trial attorney for over 40 years, it is sad to bear witness to the end of democracy. Prior to the election, multiple billionaires belonging to the 'Tech Right', referring to themselves as Dark Gothic MAGA, backed Curtis Yarvin's plan to overthrow democracy in three simple steps: 1. Gut the federal bureaucracy and replace all federal workers with 'true believers' 2. Render Congress impotent by refusing to spend money allocated by Congress for programs contrary to MAGA philosophy. 3. Ignore directives issued by SCOTUS upon the basis such Orders are only advisory, because the Judicial Branch does not possess the Constitutional power to issue binding orders to the Executive Branch. It is distressing to see the overthrow take place in real time with hardly a whimper from the public. IMO the only thing that will defeat the plan is a nationwide general strike threatening the billionaires with a total deprivation of their sources of income. Sadly, I have never seen any indication the American people have the ability to do what what the Europeans have successfully accomplished on multiple occasions.
- zfg 2y ago
  > IMO the only thing that will defeat the plan is a nationwide general strike Or a boycott of their products. Save America: don't buy Tesla.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- jaybrendansmith 2y ago
  They need to feel the pain first. If there is a major economic issue, folks will sit up and take notice. I don't wish that, but it is unfortunately the only thing that might prevent this calamity. When Andrew Jackson defied the supreme court, it took congress to eventually rein him in, but that did not stop the Trail of Tears from happening.

71 points by cmurf 2y ago

[flagged]

I'm reminded of this saying: Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progressives/#comment-729288 https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progre...

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

SiempreViernes 2y ago

[flagged]

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

baggy_trough 2y ago

[flagged]

frankfrank13 2y ago
like what?
- baggy_trough 2y ago
  For example, Obama's decision to nullify immigration law as it applied to "dreamers" via selective enforcement, in violation of the constitution's take care clause.
  - mcphage 2y ago
    > For example, Obama's decision to nullify immigration law as it applied to "dreamers" And you support this, I’m assuming?
    - baggy_trough 2y ago
      Why would you assume that?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

zfg 2y ago

The vice president sure doesn't: https://www.newsweek.com/jd-vance-comment-questioning-court-authority-sparks-backlash-2028651 https://www.newsweek.com/jd-vance-comment-questioning-court-... https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gx3j5k63xo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gx3j5k63xo This isn't a new idea for J.D. Vance. He was saying the same thing 3 years ago: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/inside-the-new-right-where-peter-thiel-is-placing-his-biggest-bets https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/inside-the-new-right... The philosophy behind this thinking comes from Curtis Yarvin. He believes American democracy is a failed project and it should be replaced with an American monarchy: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23373795/curtis-yarvin-neoreaction-redpill-moldbug https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23373795/curtis-yarv... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin America fought a war of independence to rid itself of monarchy. Yarvin and Vance want to bring it back.

jaybrendansmith 2y ago
These people are treasonous. Yes, I said it, and I will keep saying it. If you don't believe in the rule of law, get thee to some other country, you don't belong in this one.
legitster 2y ago
> Vice-president JD Vance has cited Yarvin as an influence, saying in 2021, "So there's this guy Curtis Yarvin who has written about these things," which included "Retire All Government Employees," or RAGE, written in 2012. Vance said that if Trump became president again, "I think what Trump should do, if I was giving him one piece of advice: Fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state, and replace them with our people. And when the courts stop you, stand before the country and say, 'The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.'

mminer237 2y ago

While I wholly agree with the premise, I feel the ABA has lost much of its authority as it has become an extremely partisan group. Its leaders donate lots of money to Democrat candidates, its criticisms—while often valid—are entirely one-sided, and recently the ABA has been sued for illegal "reverse" racial discrimination. As an attorney, I will say I don't know any fellow attorneys who are currently members of the ABA who are right of center.

pentel-0_5 2y ago
The language of rationalizing fascism.
jaybrendansmith 2y ago
Ad-hominem and irrelevant to the facts. As you say, the premise is still spot-on here.
mcphage 2y ago
> its criticisms—while often valid—are entirely one-sided If the criticisms are valid but one sided, then is it a problem with the ABA, or is that the two sides aren’t equivalent?
- toast0 2y ago
  Not enough information. The ABA may choose not to issue criticism of the other side, even though their would be valid criticism available. Or the other side might not do anything the ABA could object to.
legitster 2y ago
This logic is infuriating. One party is blatantly opposed to courts and legality and law. The idea that the ABA should be obligated to be non-partisan against their interests makes no sense. Nobody "owes" both sides anything. This logic would also not make sense if leveled at the NRA, farm groups, etc - or any other group with a partisan lean. If one side is just plain wrong - they are not owed 50/50 representation. And accusing them of "reverse discrimination" is ironic if you are also going to criticize them for not forcing inclusion of a political party. To put it another way: if the American Marxist Party was to suddenly become an important party, would the ABA gain authority by catering to them? In the name of non-partisanship? It makes no sense to me.

valbaca 2y ago

We've gone from "unprecendented times" to "constitutional crisis" to now. The canaries are wheezing and our country is in the midst of a full-on coup. ...but I gotta put together this microservices design because that matters I guess. We all know humanity won't last another 100 years and it seems like our government (as a representational, constitutional, democratic-republic) probably won't last another 100 days.

nonchalantsui 2y ago

It's been interesting to see the largest constitutional crisis the US has seen in 50+ years intersecting with massive social media operations. Turns out, all Richard Nixon had to do was call the constitution "woke".

keernan 2y ago

As a trial attorney for over 40 years, it is sad to bear witness to the end of democracy. Prior to the election, multiple billionaires belonging to the 'Tech Right', referring to themselves as Dark Gothic MAGA, backed Curtis Yarvin's plan to overthrow democracy in three simple steps: 1. Gut the federal bureaucracy and replace all federal workers with 'true believers' 2. Render Congress impotent by refusing to spend money allocated by Congress for programs contrary to MAGA philosophy. 3. Ignore directives issued by SCOTUS upon the basis such Orders are only advisory, because the Judicial Branch does not possess the Constitutional power to issue binding orders to the Executive Branch. It is distressing to see the overthrow take place in real time with hardly a whimper from the public. IMO the only thing that will defeat the plan is a nationwide general strike threatening the billionaires with a total deprivation of their sources of income. Sadly, I have never seen any indication the American people have the ability to do what what the Europeans have successfully accomplished on multiple occasions.

zfg 2y ago
> IMO the only thing that will defeat the plan is a nationwide general strike Or a boycott of their products. Save America: don't buy Tesla.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
jaybrendansmith 2y ago
They need to feel the pain first. If there is a major economic issue, folks will sit up and take notice. I don't wish that, but it is unfortunately the only thing that might prevent this calamity. When Andrew Jackson defied the supreme court, it took congress to eventually rein him in, but that did not stop the Trail of Tears from happening.