6
submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by iii@mander.xyz to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world

A notable example is the approach to soft drugs in the Netherlands. Despite being illegal, the public prosecutor has chosen not to enforce the law. To the point that many if not most think they're legal.

This situation presents a complex issue to me: it involves a small group of individuals (the prosecutor's office) effectively deciding to disregard the broader democratic process and the will of the voters. When such things happen, I believe they should be rare, pragmatic and temporary.

What's your view on the matter?

top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] IWW4@lemmy.zip 2 points 8 months ago

Law enforcement doesn’t make the laws. They enforce the laws the legislature creates.

There is a reason those processes are separated.

[-] DecaturNature@yall.theatl.social 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The law should be revoked. I would not assume that the legislature is more legitimate than the local prosecutor who decides not to enforce. Often this situation happens when the legislature is captured by special interests who are unconcerned with popular will (and the risk of resistance), or by a national government trying to micromanage local and personal affairs.

[-] gibmiser@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

One of the reasons immigration is so fucked in the US is because of selective enforcement of the immigration laws that occurred for decades.

Just fix the law or risk a new administration coming in and deciding to start enforcing the laws as you have to watch the chaos and pain.

[-] DecaturNature@yall.theatl.social 0 points 8 months ago

The 'selective enforcement' occurred because strict enforcement would be much more expensive than what anyone wanted -- yet a fanatical minority was able to play games in Congress to repeatedly block bipartisan deals for "comprehensive immigration reform" (under Bush, Obama, and Biden).

[-] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 8 months ago

It's always confused me how USians refer to different congressional periods as happening "under" certain presidents as if they have any actual part to play in the legislative process itself. I live in a country where the head of government is the Prime Minister, whose equivalent would be the House Majority Leader, and actually has a lot to say about the legislative agenda.

[-] DecaturNature@yall.theatl.social 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The President in the USA can veto laws. In a Constitutional sense, this gives them more power than any other single legislator. They are also the leader of their party, which can make them just as influential as the Speaker of the House (House Majority leader) when their party has the majority. The public also pays more attention to the President than the Speaker. For these reasons, and because Presidents have defined terms, it's convenient shorthand to describe a period of time.

[-] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 7 months ago

The Speaker of the House is not the same as the House Majority Leader. The current Speaker is Mike Johnson and the current Majority Leader is Steve Scalise.

[-] WolfLink@sh.itjust.works -1 points 8 months ago

This kind of thing can be considered a form of “checks and balances”. If one branch of the government passes a law and another branch enforces it, both branches have to agree for the law to function.

[-] ILoveUnions@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

No, that isn't a balance, because in that situation only one branch is deciding what gets enforced

this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2025
6 points (100.0% liked)

Ask Lemmy

39266 readers
256 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS