How much can a state realistically hold off when Republicans control the house, the senate, and have a right leaning supreme court?
EDIT: In case it wasn't clear this wasn't sarcasm or anything. I'm genuinely curious.
this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
67 points (95.9% liked)
Pleasant Politics
215 readers
98 users here now
Politics without the jerks.
This community is watched over by a ruthless robot moderator to keep out bad actors. I don't know if it will work. Read !santabot@slrpnk.net for a full explanation. The short version is don't be a net negative to the community and you can post here.
Rules
Post political news, your own opinions, or discussion. Anything goes.
All posts must follow the slrpnk sitewide rules.
No personal attacks, no bigotry, no spam. Those will get a manual temporary ban.
founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
Stay tuned for the next season of America to find out!
I don't like this show.
Don't worry. We can tape your eyes open so you'll have to watch :)
The name of the game is obstruct and delay.
So just keep delaying as much as you can until the next election that may not happen if Trump gets his way? And then once the election happens, we have to hope that the Democrats learned their lesson at the third time?
That's pretty bleak man.
There are some good obstruction techniques that others have pointed out like messing around with interstate commerce, fees, tariffs, etc, to use as leverage, too.
I'm guessing we'll see the same legal approach to things like abortion as we currently do with weed. If the fed wants to deal with it they can, but don't expect Colorado to help. Unfortunately with their new sweeping mandate from the people I expect the fed to actually care about abortion more than weed.
Illinois could start charging exorbitant tolls to Trucks to enter or leave the state and extra fees to planes coming or going to red states in order to replace any revenue lost from the federal funding. California could start charging export fees to states that don't follow climate requirements. DC could start charging security fees to the federal government and require politicians and scouts to pay for personal armed escorts wherever they go.
Almost all of that is very obviously extremely unconstitutional and would get injuncted well before it could possibly get anywhere near implementation.
Come enforce it then.
If you ignore federal court orders you will go to federal prison.
They will absolutely enforce that. States do not have the authority to charge export taxes.
There's going to arrest an entire state?
They would (and would be correct to) arrest every government official who refuses to comply with the federal order for contempt of court. It's not a difficult enforcement.
And the businesses would obviously refuse to pay illegal taxes.
If you come into a state and break the law the police would be obligated to do their jobs and arrest you for not paying and seize your shipment.
Constitutional crisis speedrun any%
That's not at all how any of this works. That's not even how tax enforcement works.
Police officers who violate a federal order telling them that they are not allowed to enforce illegal taxes will also go to federal prison. The federal government can, will, and should tear state agencies blatantly ignoring explicit federal court orders to pieces.
Like all the states currently ignoring the federal drug classification for cannabis.
It's not the same thing. The federal government probably can shut down any dispensary they want, but has made no effort to do so, largely because their actual authority to prohibit substances that don't cross state lines is not supported all that well constitutionally. That would likely end up in a lengthy legal battle either way. But it likely wouldn't require state agencies to actively enforce federal law, because there's no legal basis to force proactive law enforcement like that. (They can force action in other scenarios, eg forcing states to issue marriage certificates to gay couples, but the drug laws we're talking about don't dictate anything like that, and again, the actual authority behind regulating substances behind state lines is questionable at best.)
The fact that interstate commerce is explicitly entirely federal authority and that the Constitution explicitly prevents states from restricting it most ways makes it so there are no meaningful legal questions to an action like taxing exports. That ruling would be immediate, and anyone attempting to enforce it would be doing so in direct violation of a federal court order. There's plenty of legal basis to prohibit an action by a state that violates the rights of others.
And the federal government would absolutely make it a priority because states crippling interstate commerce would destroy the economy.
Police officers who violate a federal order telling them that they are not allowed to enforce illegal taxes will also go to federal prison.
Woah woah....are you saying we could actually crack qualified immunity?!
Because if we can, it might be worth it.
I feel like a broken record but idgaf at this point. This ends in civil war when troops are sent in to enforce the agenda of Project 2025
With the pace of litigation they can at least delay things for a good while. Cases still have to work their way up to the supreme court and get heard.
Regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations still have long public comment processes and take years to enact or repeal.
A Senate majority of 53 is workable, but also fragile. That's a pretty small margin for defections, and that is going to put some limits on what can get passed.
Maybe just split the fucking country up along the lines now voted and let each part do their own thing.
Not really fair because so few people actually support Republicans. It's a 50/50 split in voters, but so many people aren't allowed to vote or it's been made extremely difficult to vote for them or they were purged from voting registration right before the election or their district is gerrymandered to hell or they're somehow disinfrachised or scared to vote.
except cities. millions of people who do not believe in maga politics live in cities in states that voted for trump this year.
They better hurry up and move somewhere civilized.
I case you haven't noticed, courts and law mean nothing to the incoming party. These states can come up with all of the lawsuits they want to, but it won't do a bit of good.
Prepare to resist. Yes, you.
What's the worst consequence if I change my federal tax withholding and just not pay any more? Or send a USPS box full of dirty pennies instead?
Real answer: nothing...for now.
Come next year when (or if) you file your 1040, you'll be charged a penalty for underpaying your taxes.
Assuming you don't pay that, the IRS will send you a letter saying you owe them money.
Assuming you ignore it, the IRS may send an agent to your house and tell you that you have back taxes and if you don't pay, they'll press criminal charges.
Assuming you don't pay, they'll charge you in federal court.
Assuming you show up (for the love of God always show up), you'll likely not prevail and the IRS will begin to garnish your wages.
Assuming you quit your job, the IRS will begin forfeiture proceedings.
Your best bet is to run for president. I'm not even kidding. Precedence shows that running for President will allow you to push off consequences for crimes almost indefinitely. So I'd suggest that you create your PAC now and then change your withholdings.
I'm not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.
It depends. Are you extremely rich?
So apparently you can just say you're rich on paper and people will give you money and presidencies so yes I am a gazillionaire now