Utopia Talk / Politics / Trump taking away your freedoms 2

Paramount Member	Thu Sep 19 00:45:05 Your freedom to decide what to do and how to live your life: Trump strips California of power to set auto emission standards The White House has stripped California of its right to set its own vehicle emissions standards and banned other states from setting similar rules. The waiver allowed the state - America's most populous - to set stricter standards than the federal government. President Trump says the move will cut car prices and the impact on emissions will be minimal. But it is likely to spark a legal battle over states' rights. California has already taken steps to block the administration's efforts. "We will fight this latest attempt and defend our clean car standards," said Governor Gavin Newsom in a statement on Tuesday. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49746701 Wouldn’t it be better if California and other States left the US and became independent and sovereign?
superdude Member	Thu Sep 19 01:01:56 Your an idoit. If people want to drive weak hippy cars they can still do that.
kargen Member	Thu Sep 19 01:08:44 You have it backwards. California stripped the choice to drive what you want away from the people. President Trump is giving it back. And if the people crying about this really supported cleaning up the air they would get behind using more natural gas and nuclear power.
Dukhat Member	Thu Sep 19 03:53:32 The party of state's rights my ass. What's funny is that not even the car companies really want emissions standards reduced. They prefer to have regulations enforced in a fair manner so that foreign companies who cheat like Volkswagon get penalized hard. Trump and his Climate-change denialism bullshit.
kargen Member	Thu Sep 19 05:16:00 For states rights and more important, individuals rights, Libertarian is the way to go. No viable presidential candidate in the Libertarian party but it is time to start putting them in congress.
Daemon Member	Thu Sep 19 07:03:30 kargen, did Trump take away state rights or not?
CrownRoyal Member	Thu Sep 19 07:48:22 This is going to courts, even if trump federal govt wins, the automakers probably won't change their designs, because who knows what happens when donald is gone. All of this for pissing off people and shit on the environment a litte, for extra fun. The silence of all the republican and libertarian state-righters is golden though, as usual
Rugian Member	Thu Sep 19 08:13:20 I never thought I'd see the day, but Dukhat is actually correct for once. This is indeed an issue of "state's" (not states') rights. To be clear, California's ability to formulate it's own emissions standards was a deviation from federal law.no other state in the country had this ability, only California. This was a case of the federal government giving one state favorable treatment while denying it to 49 others. This is not a case of the federal government arbitrarily seizing powers that previously belonged to the states. Emissions standards were already well within the domain of the federal government; Trump simply decided to revoke preferential treatment for one state that had previously been allowed to ignore those federal standards.
hood Member	Thu Sep 19 08:19:09 It's just a case of trump ignoring the established law that grants California the right to enact those standards, which has pretty plain requirements. But this iteration of the fed ignoring and breaking laws isn't new.
Rugian Member	Thu Sep 19 11:18:51 Huh? Cite the proof that this is illegal. Because it's definitely not. (Well, it is if you believe that Resistance Judiciary's assertion that Obama-era executive decisions are permanent and irreversible, but to most normal people it's definitely legal).
hood Member	Thu Sep 19 11:38:56 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7543 If you can find a provision within the law allowing to revoke an already granted waiver, please point it out. When you fail, we can then all agree that there is no legal mechanism to revoke a waiver. Therefore, attempting to do so is both a grab of power not granted to the fed and therefore not legal.
Forwyn Member	Thu Sep 19 13:12:53 It's fairly retarded to state that said waiver, granted by an administrator, with broad discretion, is irrevocable up until the heat death of the universe. But as Ruggy said, we live in an era where unilateral EOs are now permanent and irrevocable, so...maybe?
hood Member	Thu Sep 19 14:05:21 It's kinda like people foresaw such a problem and made the waivers time limited. California has to keep applying for such waivers. Denying a waiver would have to be based on the fairly clear criteria listed in the law.
Forwyn Member	Thu Sep 19 14:25:05 Which, again, is determined by fairly broad discretion: (i) the determination of California is arbitrary and capricious
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: