140
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2025
140 points (99.3% liked)
news
24233 readers
584 users here now
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
My point isn't really that the law doesn't matter (which is also true but that's beyond the scope of this conversation). My point is "democrats didn't codify it" seems to me a true statement if the law still can be repealed. If they wanted they could have organized a freaking show trial or something if the mechanism needs to be through a lawsuit, the point is that they didn't do any of that, they just wrote some stuff in a book that can be repealed at a moment's notice. Am I wrong here and just being dumb and not understanding something?
Codify to statesian means to put a law on the books. Abortion was legal because of a court ruling not a law. That's why the supreme court could do what they did.
As far as this law goes it can't just be revoked. Either the us supreme court would need to strike it down as unconstitutional (this would likely be a lengthy court battle), or Congress needs a "supermajority" to pass a new law that invalidates the previous gay marriage law. This law can't just be "revoked" from my understanding.
Now there is a whole lot of bs the govt can pull to still get its way but technically it will still have to follow this law.
You're right that it's not impervious, but it's at least a roadblock versus there being nothing in the way. You know what I mean?
Got it. I didn't quite understand it at the beginning. Thanks a lot for the explanation
No worries, the United States legal system and the way we create laws and try to enforce them is incredibly archaic, and even most people here don't understand how it works.