@taopond Why is it Laozi isnt considered a romanization but Lao Tzu is? Neither is in chinese characters.. sincere question.
@JonKramer Petty revenge, the best kind of revenge!
Reminds me of that time the guy paid all is past due tickets with a wheelbarrow full of pennies :)
@JonKramer Those arent parking tickets.. I think all of them are old parking slips (showing you paid to park there)... Only one of them is valid. He is trying to make the parking cops life difficult by forcing them to figure out which one, if any, is valid.
@Jagahati Congratulations... I wish you all a healthy and happy future.
@BigMcLargeHuge hahah you could not pay me to be in that car!
@auldlangsin quick, start licking every toad and eati g every growth you can find... something is bou d to work!
@dabertime I recommend the fediverse, best cult in town!
@stux good luck!
Going back to the point of sovereignty as its original definition as you shared "absolute control and autonomy"... well in the USA sovereignty is split. The federal government doesnt have it because they can not do certain things, and thus dont have absolute power (points 1 - 4 are powers the federal government doesnt have over states and states are sovereign in those regards).
That is why when we talk about sovereignty without any adjectives before it we say that sovereignty int he USA is shared between the federal and state governments, each taking a piece of the pie and only collectively can their powers be seen as sovereign as a whole.
Going back to the point of sovereignty as its original definition as you shared "absolute control and autonomy"... well in the USA sovereignty is split. The federal government doesnt have it because they can not do certain things, and thus dont have absolute power (points 1 - 4 are powers the federal government doesnt have over states and states are sovereign in those regards).
That is why when we talk about sovereignty without any adjectives before it we say that sovereignty int he USA is shared between the federal and state governments, each taking a piece of the pie and only collectively can their powers be seen as sovereign as a whole.
Well we got a bit off track.. lets back up a second since yo uwont accept this particular example... We are talking about state sovreignty... well I linked a paper before and you should read it (re linked below)... it answers your question in detail, why are the states considered sovreign.
At the end it goes into some detail as to what properties give it sovreignty and what the properties are of soverignty more generally (at least according to some political scholars):
Those properties are:
1) the rule of preservation - In other words the federal government can not dissolve a state or split it, only a state can do this on its own.
2) The rule of separateness - In other words the federal government can not dictate to the states how they form their own internal governance
3) The rule of participation - The federal government can not exclude a state or restrict it from participation in the federal governement. Though it can decide who will become a state, once a state is a state those powers can be revoked.
4) The rule of interpretive independence - Thsi sets forth the jurisdiction issues we already discussed but you refused to accept.. but generally that the state has jurisdiction to interpret the laws within its own state and its court has jurisdiction over this.
Well we got a bit off track.. lets back up a second since yo uwont accept this particular example... We are talking about state sovreignty... well I linked a paper before and you should read it (re linked below)... it answers your question in detail, why are the states considered sovreign.
At the end it goes into some detail as to what properties give it sovreignty and what the properties are of soverignty more generally (at least according to some political scholars):
Those properties are:
1) the rule of preservation - In other words the federal government can not dissolve a state or split it, only a state can do this on its own.
2) The rule of separateness - In other words the federal government can not dictate to the states how they form their own internal governance
3) The rule of participation - The federal government can not exclude a state or restrict it from participation in the federal governement. Though it can decide who will become a state, once a state is a state those powers can be revoked.
4) The rule of interpretive independence - Thsi sets forth the jurisdiction issues we already discussed but you refused to accept.. but generally that the state has jurisdiction to interpret the laws within its own state and its court has jurisdiction over this.
It doesnt. Your link states cases of federal jurisdiction where the crimes have effects outside of the state, as we covered. The dojs memo even states this when talking about large drug operations refering to their potential to bleed into other states.
The page was pretty clear about the feds only being involved when it crosses state lines.
Even your own links line up with the fact that it must effect other states to be a problem... hell even the DOJ memo itself says it only cares about large operations where the drugs are expected to cross state lines, that was their own wording.
Your stuck in confirmation bias at this point. I just wish i coukd find a source talking about it directly.
If you want to argue with lawyers i dunno what to tell you... the feds cant enter a state and act as their police force for matters that are not federal jurisdiction. Not unless the state allows it.
There are a few explicit exceptions (like bankrupcy cases) where federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction, but as many legal pages state this is limited to situations where the senate has made excplicit exceptions. The page explains sone of this.
So here is one law source that mentions it breifly:
Federal laws generally focus on movement across state borders, such as drug trafficking.
For example, if you cross state lines with a large quantity of a controlled substance, you may be charged with the federal offense of drug trafficking. You may also be charged with a federal drug offense if you are caught selling drugs on government property.
Or, you may face federal drug selling charges if you sell and transport drugs using the United States Post Office or a private mail carrier.
State laws focus on possession and manufacturing.
https://nhassanlaw.com/criminal-defense/when-is-selling-drugs-a-federal-offense-vs-a-state-crime/
Here is a page that explains when the federal courts have jurisdiction:
Jeffrey Phillips Freeman
Innovator & Entrepreneur in Machine Learning, Evolutionary Computing & Big Data. Avid SCUBA diver, Open-source developer, HAM radio operator, astrophotographer, and anything nerdy.
Born and raised in Philadelphia, PA, USA, currently living in Utrecht, Netherlands, USA, and Thailand. Was also living in Israel, but left.
Pronouns: Sir / Mister
(Above pronouns are not intended to mock, i will respect any persons pronouns and only wish pronouns to show respect be used with me as well. These are called neopronouns, see an example of the word "frog" used as a neopronoun here: http://tinyurl.com/44hhej89 )
A proud member of the Penobscot Native American tribe, as well as a Mayflower passenger descendant. I sometimes post about my genealogical history.
My stance on various issues:
Education: Free to PhD, tax paid
Abortion: Protected, tax paid, limited time-frame
Welfare: Yes, no one should starve
UBI: No, use welfare
Racism: is real
Guns: Shall not be infringed
LGBT+/minorities: Support
Pronouns: Will respect
Trump: Moron, evil
Biden: Senile, racist
Police: ACAB
Drugs: Fully legal, no prescriptions needed
GPG/PGP Fingerprint: 8B23 64CD 2403 6DCB 7531 01D0 052D DA8E 0506 CBCE