The Hawaii Supreme Court handed down a unanimous opinion on Wednesday declaring that its state constitution grants individuals absolutely no right to keep and bear arms outside the context of military service. Its decision rejected the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment, refusing to interpolate SCOTUS’ shoddy historical analysis into Hawaii law. Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern discussed the ruling on this week’s Slate Plus segment of Amicus; their conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
13 points

Speaking of Texas laws, could the rest of us pass a law that allows private citizens to sue anyone in possession of guns?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

No one in their right mind would expect a law to operate like that, and it’s really just to create fear. No, it could only be passed by someone whose goals are power, fear, intimidation, control. While I wouldn’t rule Dems out of those intentions, I do have higher expectations of their constituents.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I think a better idea would be for anyone who is carrying must have insurance, but that’s not too likely either

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I agree, but Texas didn’t pass a law requiring women to get baby insurance, so it didn’t fit as well.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Yes, but then you’d have to enforce it.

A big problem with modern “well if you do X then I’ll do Y” is that - even in brighter blue states like California and Minnesota and Vermont - the local Sheriffs and Police Departments are all still Fash AF.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I think the fact that there’s no government enforcement is what allowed that to work in Texas. You couldn’t challenge the state, because it’s private citizens that are “enforcing” the law through civil action.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

You couldn’t challenge the state, because it’s private citizens that are “enforcing” the law through civil action.

Its private citizens who are alerting sheriff’s deputies and local pd by filing these complaints. They’ve effectively created a kind of legal framework for anti-abortion SWATing.

The system only works because the cops/prosecutors/judges are assumed willing to play along. Specifically, Ken Paxton - the state AG - is fishing for pregnant woman and their attendant physicians to hook and hammer. He’s outsourced the process of detective work to his horde of little online gumshoes. But the ability to exercise violence on anyone spotted is still reserved to his friendly officers corpse.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Sure, right after we pass a law that allows gun owners to shoot anyone who sues them. That makes about as much sense as what you said.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

That makes about as much sense as what you said.

Someone should have told Governor Abbot that. Granted it’s been struck down now…

Texas’ abortion law, passed last year as Senate Bill 8, empowers private citizens to sue anyone who “aids or abets” an abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy.

The law is extremely broad — anyone, regardless of where they live or whether they have a connection to the person obtaining an abortion, can bring a lawsuit against anyone who helps someone obtain an abortion in virtually any way.

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/03/24/texas-abortion-law-legal-challenges/

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That’s exactly what I was referring to, though I had no idea it’s been struck down. Good to hear!

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yep that’s some dumb shit that they never should have done, I agree.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 15K

    Posts

  • 438K

    Comments