Should the U.S. president suspend the constitution?

[The Reformed American Republic]

Paint a black fist on authoritarianism with support for "diversity" and they'd support it.

Only if you deliberately strawman liberals and progressives.

You guy's aren't magically immune to the appeal of authoritarianism. FDR was one of the presidents who started this whole power without checks system.

[Kowani]

Only if you deliberately strawman liberals and progressives.

You guy's aren't magically immune to the appeal of authoritarianism. FDR was one of the presidents who started this whole power without checks system.

Laughs in Andrew Jackson

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Only if you deliberately strawman liberals and progressives.

You guy's aren't magically immune to the appeal of authoritarianism. FDR was one of the presidents who started this whole power without checks system.

Nobody is, but let’s not presume that all or even most of us would be willing to get down with authoritarianism, especially strawman “painted with a black fist and advocating diversity” authoritarianism.

[The Reformed American Republic]

You guy's aren't magically immune to the appeal of authoritarianism. FDR was one of the presidents who started this whole power without checks system.

Laughs in Andrew Jackson

This is about relatively recent emergency powers that developed from the 20th century. Don't be pedantic.

You guy's aren't magically immune to the appeal of authoritarianism. FDR was one of the presidents who started this whole power without checks system.

Nobody is, but let’s not presume that all or even most of us would be willing to get down with authoritarianism, especially strawman “painted with a black fist and advocating diversity” authoritarianism.

If it's your guy, you'd probably roll with it. Not saying all of you will, but probably more than you'd like to admit. Plus, it's not like I only singled you guys out.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I'm saying if I had to choose. But I don't. I'm happy here on the Island Continent.

Did you know, the contiguous US and mainland Australia have very nearly the same land area?

Yes. Though I'm not going to pretend I'm good at geography.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand, this is actually pretty scary and I doubt the Supreme Court is going to check these powers and neither will the useless congress.

If everyone else is plain useless at defending the Constitution, why not assume that President Trump is equally useless at violating it?

I mean, he has proven himself generally useless at everything except brutalizing children and selling the powers of his office. Being dictator of America is a bit beyond him, isn't it?

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Only if you deliberately strawman liberals and progressives.

You guy's aren't magically immune to the appeal of authoritarianism. FDR was one of the presidents who started this whole power without checks system.

FDR was one of our guys eighty fucking years ago. He did well, for then.

Maybe you'd like to compare one of your guys, who dealt with a depression and then a massive war, followed by another massive war off the other coast?

Little Donald buckled under the stern gaze of the US Congress. Then he fell flat confronting the Coronavirus. Don't you dare compare this pathetic fraction of a businessman whose inflated ego could not be satisfied by anything less than President of the United State, with Jimmy Carter. Or for that matter, George Herbert Walker Bush.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

If it's your guy, you'd probably roll with it.

And I’m sure if it was your guy you’d probably roll with it, given previous statements about socialists and their loss of citizenship and deportation thereafter. But I’d rather we didn’t be needlessly presumptuous. Problem with what you’re saying is that I’m LibLeft, I’m heavily against the AuthLeft just as much as I’m against the AuthRight considering I’d most likely be just as dead under for example) a Stalinist or Maoist regime as I would be under a fascist or Nazi regime.

Not saying all of you will, but probably more than you'd like to admit.

I doubt it.

Plus, it's not like I only singled you guys out.

From what I’ve seen it doesn’t seem that way.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Tell me, do the "essential" rights include those not to be individually taxed (16th amendment 1909)? How about the right not to be searched without warrant (PATRIOT act 2001)?

You're behind enemy lines already. You're not going to fight, obviously. You grew up behind the lines. It might be time to surrender, you know, not because it's honorable which it is, but just to save your own ass?

Well, to conservatives, all they care about is abortion and low taxes. American liberals aren't much better. Paint a black fist on authoritarianism with support for "diversity" and they'd support it.

To me, I think being searched without a warrant is much worse than being taxed. Regardless, I'm still going to be critical of the status quo as we're not a dictatorship... yet. If things get really bad, I'd probably just move. I have Irish and English ancestry. Maybe I'll try to move to one of those places.

Yes, this is a problem, though I'm not surprised that this exists. People are completely willing to give up essential rights and ironically some of the supposed "freedom" defenders would be the first to give it up.

Supposed Freedom Defenders = Conservatives
I also mentioned conservatives.

I didn't single out progressives.

[Kubra]

I really don't think much of this. Not because I think suspending the Constitution and rounding folks up is good or anything, but because I expect the US has a plan for every contingency whatsoever, complete with a full archive of wacky sci-fi events that some policy wonk justified with "well I mean anything could happen". It's pretty emblematic of US defense bureaucracy.

[Unstoppable Empire of Doom]

But the existence of the PEADs was not previously known to the public.

You do realize that the article cites "experts" and "I have heard". In other words its some persons conspiratorial fantasy.

[Freiheit Reich]

Paint a black fist on authoritarianism with support for "diversity" and they'd support it.

Only if you deliberately strawman liberals and progressives.

It is a good point. Few liberals criticized Obama for supporting the Patriot Act and being tough towards Snowden (despite promising a 'transparent government') because Obama has 3 important points 1) he is a democrat and 2) he is a mulatto 3) he is charismatic and has a friendly smile.

Bush/Cheney were deservedly criticized heavily by liberals for the Patriot Act and the Iraq invasion but Obama supported both of these actions once in office and few liberals questioned him (despite criticizing these actions when he was running for president).

Imagine if Michele Obama or a member of 'the squad' becomes president. The popular newspapers would never criticize anything they did, even trampling civil liberties, for fear of being called 'racist' or 'misogynist' or worse 'anti-liberal.'

[Albrenia]

What's 'the squad'?

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Well, to conservatives, all they care about is abortion and low taxes. American liberals aren't much better. Paint a black fist on authoritarianism with support for "diversity" and they'd support it.

To me, I think being searched without a warrant is much worse than being taxed. Regardless, I'm still going to be critical of the status quo as we're not a dictatorship... yet. If things get really bad, I'd probably just move. I have Irish and English ancestry. Maybe I'll try to move to one of those places.

Yes, this is a problem, though I'm not surprised that this exists. People are completely willing to give up essential rights and ironically some of the supposed "freedom" defenders would be the first to give it up.

Supposed Freedom Defenders = Conservatives
I also mentioned conservatives.

I didn't single out progressives.

Fair enough then, tho you seem to talk about them more heavily then conservatives at times to be fair.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Supposed Freedom Defenders = Conservatives
I also mentioned conservatives.

I didn't single out progressives.

Fair enough then, tho you seem to talk about them more heavily then conservatives at times to be fair.

Yes, on social issues, though that's because I'm more conservative on such issues. This isn't about social issues, but rather constitutional ones.

[Freiheit Reich]

What's 'the squad'?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Squad ... s_Congress)

The Squad is the informal name for a group of four women elected in the 2018 United States House of Representatives elections, made up of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan. All are women of color under 50,[1] have been supported by the Justice Democrats political action committee, and are on the left wing of the Democratic Party.[2][3] All four hold safe seats in the House of Representatives, with Cook PVIs of at least D+26.

The group has been said to represent the demographic diversity of a younger political generation and the advocacy of progressive policies such as the Green New Deal, which have sometimes clashed with their party's leadership.[4][5][6][7] Ocasio-Cortez coined the "Squad" name in an Instagram post a week after the 2018 election. The photo, taken at a VoteRunLead event where all four members spoke, subsequently went viral.[8]

[Albrenia]

What's 'the squad'?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Squad ... s_Congress)

The Squad is the informal name for a group of four women elected in the 2018 United States House of Representatives elections, made up of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan. All are women of color under 50,[1] have been supported by the Justice Democrats political action committee, and are on the left wing of the Democratic Party.[2][3] All four hold safe seats in the House of Representatives, with Cook PVIs of at least D+26.

The group has been said to represent the demographic diversity of a younger political generation and the advocacy of progressive policies such as the Green New Deal, which have sometimes clashed with their party's leadership.[4][5][6][7] Ocasio-Cortez coined the "Squad" name in an Instagram post a week after the 2018 election. The photo, taken at a VoteRunLead event where all four members spoke, subsequently went viral.[8]

Thanks!

[Li Jing]

No. The whole point of a constitution (okay one of the points) is to avoid absolute authority. Enter the Magna Carta.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Tell me, do the "essential" rights include those not to be individually taxed (16th amendment 1909)? How about the right not to be searched without warrant (PATRIOT act 2001)?

You're behind enemy lines already. You're not going to fight, obviously. You grew up behind the lines. It might be time to surrender, you know, not because it's honorable which it is, but just to save your own ass?

Well, to conservatives, all they care about is abortion and low taxes. American liberals aren't much better. Paint a black fist on authoritarianism with support for "diversity" and they'd support it.

To me, I think being searched without a warrant is much worse than being taxed.

You're just not used to it yet. Then, Federal government wanted to tax "equally" but in state terms, it was taxing the richest states to provide for the poorest. The poorest states are still poor, and generally the get more Federal spending than they give up in taxes. But that's OK. Call it partial success, in relieving state-by-state poverty.

In this century, Government is scared shitless of private enterprise having most of the citizen information there is to get. Government wants in on that, because in this century information is power.

You missed both those trains. If you care about your remaining freedom then get back to the frontline and stop the stupid posturing about freedoms long gone. You're behind enemy lines. Your options are to move position, or become a prisoner of war.

Regardless, I'm still going to be critical of the status quo as we're not a dictatorship... yet. If things get really bad, I'd probably just move. I have Irish and English ancestry. Maybe I'll try to move to one of those places.

Your ancestors didn't do such a dumb move. You won't either.

[Newero]

The US constitution is a disgusting thing. I use toilet paper with it written on.

Constitutions are good, don't get me wrong, but the American one is severely outdated..

[Freiheit Reich]

The US constitution is a disgusting thing. I use toilet paper with it written on.

Constitutions are good, don't get me wrong, but the American one is severely outdated..

This is not true. The constitution is still very relevant. However, the big concern is the fact that many politicians agree with you and just want to grab power and trample freedoms today and don't care about the constitution. Why do you think it is outdated?

https://www.airtract.com/article/Why-Is ... 7-Reasons-

[Nobel Hobos 2]

The US constitution is a disgusting thing. I use toilet paper with it written on.

Constitutions are good, don't get me wrong, but the American one is severely outdated..

I quite like the US constitution. All the electoral stuff is severely outdated, but the Bill of Rights has proven its worth. The enumerated rights are very well protected in the US, and the missing rights (Right to vote, rights to control ones own body, right to privacy, copyright more tightly bound to the creator, right to education, right to healthcare) are not forbidden. The one over-riding criticism of the US constitution is that it is too hard to amend.

Australia barely has a constitution, and it is easy to change. But because it is so easy to change, it is very weakly binding. This is a balance every country must strike.

[Newero]

The US constitution is a disgusting thing. I use toilet paper with it written on.

Constitutions are good, don't get me wrong, but the American one is severely outdated..

This is not true. The constitution is still very relevant. However, the big concern is the fact that many politicians agree with you and just want to grab power and trample freedoms today and don't care about the constitution. Why do you think it is outdated?

https://www.airtract.com/article/Why-Is ... 7-Reasons-

I mean, some people take the 1st ammendment way too far, the 2nd ammendment is just... yeah. I should've explained myself better. I do agree with a lot of it, but the ones people pay attention to are pretty outdated.

To be honest, I actually forgot some of the good stuff on it. My bad.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

The US constitution is a disgusting thing. I use toilet paper with it written on.

Constitutions are good, don't get me wrong, but the American one is severely outdated..

This is not true. The constitution is still very relevant. However, the big concern is the fact that many politicians agree with you and just want to grab power and trample freedoms today and don't care about the constitution. Why do you think it is outdated?

https://www.airtract.com/article/Why-Is-The-Constitution-Important--7-Reasons-

That goes wrong at the third graphic. "Executive government" in Australia is part of Parliament. The head of each Department is a Cabinet minister, who is an elected member of Parliament.

So not only has the author pulled a graphic from Australian politics, to explain US politics, but they haven't even got the Australian version right. We don't have a President, so the Cabinet is not appointed by an elected President. Prime Ministers serve at the pleasure of the majority of Parliament, and Cabinet entirely at the pleasure of the Prime Minister.

[Chan Island]

No.

And this briefing things sounds like the standard 'yeah, when there are enemy troops storming the trenches in Annapolis we probably ought to do something' type of stuff that many countries have.

Which is not OK. In that kind of crisis the country should be onboard with doing things quickly anyway, entirely without the need for suspending the constitution. This type of stuff is always just a ticking time bomb waiting for abuse.

[Freiheit Reich]

This is not true. The constitution is still very relevant. However, the big concern is the fact that many politicians agree with you and just want to grab power and trample freedoms today and don't care about the constitution. Why do you think it is outdated?

https://www.airtract.com/article/Why-Is ... 7-Reasons-

I mean, some people take the 1st ammendment way too far, the 2nd ammendment is just... yeah. I should've explained myself better. I do agree with a lot of it, but the ones people pay attention to are pretty outdated.

To be honest, I actually forgot some of the good stuff on it. My bad.

The first amendment has become too weakened although Americans have more free speech rights than Germans so it has protected Americans a bit. Hate speech should be protected (many people on this website disagree on this point though).

The second amendment is vital to protecting the USA from becoming another North Korea or China and also protects the USA from foreign invasion. Didn't you watch 'Red Dawn' (the original version) to see why gun rights is so important? Also, Mexico has a higher murder rate and weaker gun rights. Violent criminals don't care about gun laws. The lack of guns in North Korea is a reason that Kim Jong-un can trample over people's rights without worry. He is like a cobra while his people are toothless worms that can't fight back.

The virus and protests has resulted in some rights such as freedom of religion and assembly heavily restricted. The USA is undergoing a constitutional crisis and it is a good test. Curfews have been placed (riots are not a good excuse to impose curfews) and churches have been ordered to close down in some states. Also, cruel punishment exists. People have had to spend many years in jail for such crimes as stealing a TV or a piece of pizza. Some prisons are very dangerous or treat prisoners too harshly.

Bill of Rights

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/billofrights

Bill of Rights
Primary tabs
First Amendment [Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition (1791)] (see explanation)
Second Amendment [Right to Bear Arms (1791)] (see explanation)
Third Amendment [Quartering of Troops (1791)] (see explanation)
Fourth Amendment [Search and Seizure (1791)] (see explanation)
Fifth Amendment [Grand Jury, Double Jeopardy, Self-Incrimination, Due Process (1791)] (see explanation)
Sixth Amendment [Criminal Prosecutions - Jury Trial, Right to Confront and to Counsel (1791)] (see explanation)
Seventh Amendment [Common Law Suits - Jury Trial (1791)] (see explanation)
Eighth Amendment [Excess Bail or Fines, Cruel and Unusual Punishment (1791)] (see explanation)
Ninth Amendment [Non-Enumerated Rights (1791)] (see explanation)
Tenth Amendment [Rights Reserved to States or People (1791)] (see explanation)

Cruel And Unusual Punishment At A Major Federal Prison

https://abovethelaw.com/2019/02/cruel-a ... al-prison/