How about charging politicians with economic crimes against humanity if their policies are disproportionately detrimental to one group of people over another?
I don’t understand the petition bit. What’s that supposed to do besides create the illusion in people’s minds that they’ve done something, so they do no more?
So you do understand it, then.
That would be political suicide with no upside for the politician. If I know anything about politicians it is that they serve their own interests before anything else. Besides, such a law would not make it past the low courts, jury nullification, etc. As for the convention, they know such a convention would also open the doors up to adding in an ammendment to get money out of politics so I would welcome such an attempt. http://www.wolf-pac.com/
Were he an autocrat, I would. However, despite the F.U.D. this election has spawned, our governmental system has not changed.
Too bad your constitution is interpreted by partisan hacks instead of competent jurists.
Much like sexual assault, refusing to pay your workers, massive fraud, openly mocking physically disabled people, and calling for violence against people who protest you are political suicide. Most Americans who voted for Trump are going to like this idea and a sizable portion of those who didn’t can easily be disenfranchised before the next election. Low courts don’t matter if you appeal to higher courts, juries don’t matter for terrorism charges because the US government doesn’t do trials for those.
America doesn’t actually have any checks or balances. It’s been an executive order away from totalitarianism at least since 9/11.
The government can’t appeal a acquittal can they? I think realism may be a better option than alarmism.
I assumed you meant the law would be blocked by lower courts. If you are talking about acquittals, please refer back to the “no trials for terrorists” thing. I think realism may include objectively looking at the actual effect of the law in a country rather than imagining that governments will obey the spirit of it.
We fight. We fight today, tomorrow, and the next day. We fight till the end of our time. We fight and set the next generation to fight. There will be no peace in our time. We must crush the enemy every day.
“economic terrorism” Hmmm.
As a concept, can we apply it to the utter economic incompetence of those promoting rightwing neoliberal economics (especially privatisations of natural monopolies) And charge them for it too?
Look at those democrats with their disrespect for private property! That image is disgusting!
Questioning policies of the Donald on the forum? You’re a comment terrorist! GUARDS?!
It’s an exercise in legal semantics. Some assemblies might be peaceable, but if a given assembly can be labelled economic terrorism then it is no longer peaceable, and loses constitutional protection.
Hey this is an Official Doctorow Outrage, dont come bringing facts into the discussion.
It will be interesting to see if the law is applied to protesters outside of women’s health clinics.
for fucks sake…that is a dangerous idea.
If this is going to be a thing, I nominate the banks that extorted insane amounts of money from the US because they were “too big to fail”.
Speaking of that image…
I was thinking the other day about Trump’s claim that he’ll force other NATO countries to subsidise the US military.
Y’all remember what the taxes in “no taxation wthout representation” were meant to pay for?
…where are the crowdfunding efforts?