Policing the Police Act of 2014 (Redraft passed) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 10, 2024, 09:15:11 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Policing the Police Act of 2014 (Redraft passed) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Policing the Police Act of 2014 (Redraft passed)  (Read 18949 times)
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,199


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
« on: April 21, 2015, 10:38:48 AM »

The federal government can attach strings to funding as long as their strings are not coercive. I haven't read the current bill prior to Blair's amendment, but so long as the demands by  the senate are not coercive or too intrusive, then it's constitutional. From Blair's amendment, I already am suspicious of federal oversight of a state agency. I'm not sure whether that would be constitutional. I understand those saying "well we can't let a state agency keep this up," but unless there is some sort of federal amendment passed, each state has control over their policing powers so long as they don't break any federal amendments.

But to correct others in this thread, yes, the Courts do have a say in the bills passed by this body. It's called Judicial Review. Surely some of you have heard of it, no? Tongue

Sorry for the interruption. Carry on.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,199


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
« Reply #1 on: April 22, 2015, 09:24:33 AM »

I'll wait for Polnuts amendment, but I think I speak for most labor senators in saying that we can actual reform-not just a re-arranging of deckchairs on the titantic

To do what you want to do, you'll need to pass a federal amendment nationalizing law enforcement because right now, policing powers are left to the regions.

Otherwise, Polnut's bill will need to be passed because it's actually constitutional and would survive a court challenge.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,199


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
« Reply #2 on: April 23, 2015, 12:26:47 PM »

It is legal for a citizen to film a police officer, yes, so long as you are not interfering unreasonably.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,199


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
« Reply #3 on: April 24, 2015, 03:54:37 PM »
« Edited: April 24, 2015, 03:56:24 PM by Duke »

It's not about ideology or opposing the bill. It's about constitutionality. The federal government, legally, cannot set up an oversight agency to police, no pun intended, state or local police department. The senate can pass a law doing that, but the Court can and will overturn it, and then no progress will have been made.

You can put strings on funding and direct where it can go, but you can't directly meddle in regional affairs. The only way to accomplish that is to pass a federal amendment removing policing powers as a right left to regions/states.

Federal agencies already have access to state and local law enforcement documents and media through the subpoena power if the government brings a federal case against a state agency or actor.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.021 seconds with 12 queries.