Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
4. The executive branch and Congress need to respond to the will of the American people
Tue May 8, 2012, 08:11 PM
May 2012

because, after more than a decade of votes and polls that indicate an overwhelming majority of voters want to get rid of the lies that have been part of American law since the 1970s - they are doing a disservice to this nation to continue to enforce laws based upon those lies.

What next? Gay marriage? MannyGoldstein May 2012 #1
Now if we can just get the feds to quit ignoring state laws. Lionessa May 2012 #2
Sadly, this administration shares that knack with its predecessors villager May 2012 #3
The executive branch and Congress need to respond to the will of the American people RainDog May 2012 #4
i agree but not because a majority of people, that's a slippery slope I won't go near. Lionessa May 2012 #5
I agree - but the reason a majority want the law to change is because of the science RainDog May 2012 #6
Well we hope that's the reason, but in the end it doesn't matter, Lionessa May 2012 #7
Since the govt can no longer control information about this topic RainDog May 2012 #9
Thanks for fighting the good fight RainDog. iscooterliberally May 2012 #24
thanks for those kind words RainDog May 2012 #26
That's pretty much what Arizona is arguing at the SC in regard to SB1070 CactusJak May 2012 #8
Yes, however the OPs title is inaccurate. Fed law does outrank State law for Lionessa May 2012 #10
it is indeed a very tough road to walk - if you are a federal truedelphi May 2012 #14
Arizona is arguing against human rights RainDog May 2012 #11
You say: truedelphi May 2012 #15
here's a link RainDog May 2012 #16
I see this as a win for human rights, not because of the origin of the law. I'm encouraged by it. freshwest May 2012 #12
Same hear. And a big shout out to raindog for truedelphi May 2012 #13
It's from Dec. 2011 RainDog May 2012 #17
I'd have never known if you hadn't. This is the first I heard. Thanks! freshwest May 2012 #20
Misleading headline -- Actually, as stated in the story, "The U.S. Supreme Court REFUSED TO REVIEW AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #18
Excuse me but doesn't the USSC refusal to review a case mean bupkus May 2012 #21
Of course that's what that means. In contrast, it does not mean (as improperly implied by the AnotherMcIntosh May 2012 #23
Does This Mean DallasNE May 2012 #19
Federal agencies can make arrests in states. RainDog May 2012 #22
Even though Meiko May 2012 #25
Do you know that Arizona has had to vote for the same law three times? RainDog May 2012 #27
kick b/c I'm so pissed at what is going on now. n/t RainDog Dec 2012 #28
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Drug Policy»U.S. Supreme Court: Feder...»Reply #4