"States' rights" was supposed to mean "small government" and "local control". The recent shift toward preemption of local ordinances pulls back the veil and proves that the argument only held sway because there were disproportionately more conservative states than conservative voters at the national scale. Now they're shifting power back upwards and away from citizens because there are disproportionately more conservative states than conservative cities. States are their last holdout where institutional power hasn't yet been sufficiently and consistently diluted by their decline in numbers. They don't give a single, solitary shit about "small government". They give a shit about conservative government. Everything else, to them, is illegitimate.
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
States rights meant preserving slavery. Any other meaning is a retcon.
And even then it wasn't really States' Rights. The Fugitive Slave Act forced northern free states to treat escaped slaves as though they were "self-stolen property" rather than people who escaped from being slaves.
Conservatives are all about states' rights only if it absences their goals. If a large federal government would advance their goals better (for example, continuing slavery or banning abortion), then they'll ditch states' rights quickly.
They give a shit about conservative government.
They care about power, nothing else.
Abbott will declare himself king of Texas before he's done. Texas Republicans will go along with it.
To the surprise of noone who passed the bar exam. Republicans know the shit they do is illegal and they try to do it anyway. That's the headline here.
Successfully, in many cases. Here in Ohio our district maps were declared illegal by the supreme court. We're still using them over a year later.
There are less Republicans and they want to force their beliefs and ideas on the majority. They don't want young people voting. They are working on ways to stop this.
Stop voting for Republicans. They don't believe in our democracy.
Also start voting. Too many Texans think they're too cool to vote.
They don't really want anyone voting except maybe the in group. Hence the various means of voter suppression of minorities.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Greg Abbott of Texas, a Republican, signed a bill into law in June that prohibited cities from passing certain local ordinances.
District Judge Maya Guerra Gamble of Texas announced the decision on Wednesday in response to a lawsuit from the city of Houston.
"I am thrilled that Houston, our legal department, and sister cities were able to obtain this victory for Texas cities," Mayor Sylvester Turner of Houston wrote in a statement.
"The Office of the Attorney General has also immediately appealed because the ruling is incorrect.
Texas saw protests from construction workers and their allies who said that an end to local water break mandates would result in more incidents of heat-related illness and death.
"While we expect an appeal, it remains clear this law is an unacceptable infringement on the rights of Texans and cities."
The original article contains 312 words, the summary contains 137 words. Saved 56%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
AG has already appealed judge decision, as we all expected