This is honestly one reason I enjoy studying it. It has so many layers and permutations. Its frustrating and yet fascinating.
This was my favorite subject in my law classes.
But after the two semesters there wasn't a lot of classes to follow.
Lack of constitutional law was prolly one of the main reasons I didn't go to law school.
Yeah its almost more of scholarly pursuit beyond Con Law 1-3. Which seems sort of counter-intuitive. One would think it would be a mainstay subject for law schools.This was my favorite subject in my law classes.
But after the two semesters there wasn't a lot of classes to follow.
Lack of constitutional law was prolly one of the main reasons I didn't go to law school.
Sanrith Descartes with your previous studies you must have read some good books on u.s. governments and civics. Any suggestions? Textbooks or regular books.
I would start with some basic by the giants in the field. Seminal works.Sanrith Descartes with your previous studies you must have read some good books on u.s. governments and civics. Any suggestions? Textbooks or regular books.
Anyone have thoughts on mandated masks in public?
Feels like an over reach.
The Corona thread is a shit show for any meaningful response.
Cad want to swing through here and give us the $5000/hr answer? Lol
My amateur two cents. I agree there is settled case law on the needs to keep people safe trumping the civil liberties of infected/carriers. I have read snippets of opinions in those same cases where it was specifically questioned by Justices in terms of applying to healthy people.
I dont feel the rulings of forced evacuations due to gas main break etc could be successfully used for this. I also don't think one of the first acts was closing the courts to normal business was a coincidence. I honestly feel there are governors going with better to take the slap on the wrist after the fact. Its not like they can be sued or held liable afterwards.
But I am an amateur on a gaming forum so odds are I am totally wrong on this shit.
I don't think it's really a constitutional issue, there are older SCOTUS cases from the 1918 pandemic and previous quarantines saying the govt's do have the power to do relatively invasive things for public health reasons.
The question I have is whether they can quarantine and limit otherwise healthy people - I think it's clear they can impose restrictions on sick people, but healthy people?
It's not a clear constitutional issue though, there's no clause or amendment on point. Especially as relating to the state governments which are the ones doing this shit.
But arent civil rights violations one of those things they dont have immunity from?Suing states is very difficult under the best of circumstances due to sovereign immunity. States have to pass acts allowing you to sue them for things they find politically required.
Look up the torts claims act in your local state and start reading about the narrow things you're allowed to sue them for.
I would start with some basic by the giants in the field. Seminal works.
Robert Dahl - On Democracy. Polyarchy.
Samuel Huntington - Clash of Civilizations. The 3rd Wave.
Larry Dodd - Congress Reconsidered.
Joe Schumpeter - Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy
Morris Fiorina - Congress: Keystone of the Washington Establishment
Andrew Chadwick - Internet Politics
That should be a decent start
But arent civil rights violations one of those things they dont have immunity from?
I think you are saying this just to reinforce the exorbitant fees lawyers charge. "Trust me Mr. Jones, the law surrounding your traffic ticket is quite complex. Oh, here is your billable hours sheet".Not really, and this question is enormously complex because of contradictory SCOTUS rulings. It's not an easy 1,2 type of analysis.