US Politics

[SomTervo]

Frankly a big part of me is disappointed more countries aren't doing similar things re Syria and IS. IS mainly.

[TheRevanchist]

Yeah, Syria is a dick country, but IS is worse.  WAY worse.  I hope everything ends with a peaceful closure, but you know that's pretty rare in the Middle East, especially with people as blood thirsty as these Sunni zealots seem to be.

[SomTervo]

It's another re-enactment of the perennial religious crusade isn't it. Like, exactly the same thing happened in the 11th century, this time with mirrored velocity.

 

When will this shit end. When religion's gone? I hope not, because people have the right to believe in whatever they want. But it's the only way I can see this shit ever having a definite end.

[TheMightyEthan]

People will always fight over ideologies, whether or not it's specifically "religion".  See the Cold War.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/10/politics/isis-obama-speech/index.html

 

My body is ready /s.

 

Quit giving ISIS attention and they might go away. Why is this even the US's problem? God damnit.

[TheMightyEthan]

Kansas has seized sex toys for unpaid taxes, and now they are being sold at auction.

 

[TheRevanchist]

Oh, man, I cannot wait to go to articles about this for the pure joy of reading the comments.  So many sex jokes and such little time.

[SomTervo]

 

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/10/politics/isis-obama-speech/index.html

 

My body is ready /s.

Quit giving ISIS attention and they might go away. Why is this even the US's problem? God damnit.

No way- in most cases I 100% agree with the 'stop covering it' approach to mass murdering campaigns, but this is very different.

 

There has never been an invading violent group as numbered, as widespread, or with as much money as IS. They are literally unprecedented as a non-nationstate group. The amount of ground they've covered in a short amount of time is terrifying. Obviously US isn't in any line of fire atm, but there's rapidly growing support for them in many countries which could threaten the US (including the US).

 

Like if it weren't for Japan you could easily say the same about WWII. US weren't directly threatened by Germany physically- that doesn't mean it isn't everyone's problem. Tho IS are further away obviously

Edited September 26, 2014 by kenshi_ryden

[TheMightyEthan]

IS really isn't that much farther from the US than Germany is.  Maybe 25-30%.

[SomTervo]

Aye, on a planetary scale that is pretty far though? Many more small countries in between.

 

But it's besides the point anyway- they're all about ideology not sovereignty, so borders don't actually matter.

[TheMightyEthan]

I don't know, they seem different in that they seem to be trying to set up an actual state, rather than just fighting.

[Mal]

A state if left to form that will be a breeding ground of terrorists. Think of the Taliban Afghanistan but worse since IS' founding principle is to very antagonistic to non-Sunni Muslims who do not follow their ideals. They are very cut and dry when it comes to their beliefs... very cut and dry. We have a choice of striking first or wait for the next attack. The US and their allies are choosing to strike first which I have to agree with. Though I'll reiterate my feelings about the US going: I have a feeling it'll be a very long rabbit hole we are going into (Imagine if we are stringing along the Turks, who's are really the boots on the ground, with promises of making their own state then crush that dream? That an easily created fucking enemies for a hundred years.). Really, the US has been at war in some form or another in the Middle East/Afghanistan for pretty much my whole life. Frustrating to think about really.

 

Anyways... the IS cannot even function if we leave them be since nobody recognize them. They don't have a China who will send them humanitarian aid and they don't even accept humanitarian aid since they fucking kill the aid workers. At best they become the 2nd North Korea, a mere nuisance, but one that can potentially engage in sending terrorists everywhere. In any case, the IS might just devolve into a lawless land. Think Yemen but bigger and, again, more dangerous.

 

My face:

[TheMightyEthan]

Just to be clear, I'm not saying they're BETTER because they're trying to form a state, just different.

[SomTervo]

I'm not sure they're trying to form a state- I think the name refers to the ideal Islamic State and generally trying to turn EVERY nation they encounter into one. Like literally a religious crusade.

Edited September 28, 2014 by kenshi_ryden

[TheMightyEthan]

No, they're forming a state, they collect taxes and issue license plates.

[Mal]

Eboooooolaaa.

 

We'll be fine.

[TheMightyEthan]

Yeah, ebola's transmission mechanics make it not terribly dangerous in a country like the US with good sanitation and whatnot.

[deanb]

[Mal]

I'll admit, transmission by sweat is pretty damn metal.

[TheMightyEthan]

So today the US Supreme Court declined to hear appeals from 5 states in 3 circuits which had ruled that you can't ban gay marriage.  This has the effective result of legalizing gay marriage not only in those 5 states, but also in 6 additional states with gay marriage bans that are in the same circuits, so 11 states total.  This is because those circuit court rulings are now the law in those 3 circuits, so any challenges to gay marriage bans there should be successful.  Counting these 11 states gay marriage is effectively legal in 30 states, and the 9th circuit is expected to overturn gay marriage bans any day, bringing it to 35.

[Mr. GOH!]

If another Circuit Appeals Court rules against gay marriage, then SCOTUS will likely have to rule to eliminate the split.

[TheMightyEthan]

Yeah.  And the article I read said the 6th circuit also has two cases before it, and they think it's fairly likely to uphold them.

[SomTervo]

What is the defenition of these 'Circuits'? Never heard that terminology before.
 

Edited October 9, 2014 by kenshi_ryden

[TheMightyEthan]

The US federal court system has 3 levels: the "district" trial courts, the circuit courts of appeals, and the supreme court.  Each state has at least one federal district court, with many having more than one.  The next step up is the circuit courts of appeals, of which there are 12: 10 numbered circuits (1-10), the DC Circuit and the Federal Circuit.  The federal courts of each state are within one of the numbered circuits (for instance Kansas is in the 10th circuit, California is in the 9th, etc), with each circuit encompassing multiple states (except for the DC and Federal circuits, which are special).  So if the Federal Court for the District of Kansas makes a ruling, and that ruling is appealed, that appeal is heard by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.  The 10th Circuit also encompasses Oklahoma, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming.

 

What happened here is three of the circuits had ruled that you can't ban gay marriage based on challenges to laws in 5 states, and the states that had made those laws appealed to the Supreme Court of the US.  SCOTUS declined to hear the appeals, which means the circuit court decisions stand.  This had the effect of legalizing gay marriage in those 5 states, but it also tangentially legalized it in all the other states in those three circuits.  This is because the circuit court rulings are now the law of the land in those circuits.  For instance, one of the states that got its law struck down was Oklahoma, in the 10th Circuit.  Well now if there's a challenge to a ban in any other state in the 10th Circuit, say Kansas or Colorado, the trial court in that state is bound to follow the ruling of the 10th Circuit court, which is that you can't ban gay marriage.

[Mr. GOH!]

OOOH! Fed Courts question; my favorite type!

 

The federal courts in the United States are structured as follows: there are 94 federal judicial districts int he United states, and each has a corresponding federal district court. In some districts tehre are multiple courthouses, but all district courthouses in the same district are considered the same federal district court. These courts are the trial courts, the lowest-level federal courts. They make findings of fact and law and are the first federal courts to rule on the vast majority of federal lawsuits filed in the U.S.A. 

 

Above the federal district courts are the Circuit Courts of Appeals. There are 12 Circuits in the U.S.A., and each federal judicial district is subject to one of the Circuits. So, for example, I practice two federal District courts; the Southern District of New York State and the Eastern District of New York State (New York City encompasses two different federal districts). Both of those district courts are in the Second Circuit. 

 

The Circuit Courts of Appeal are exactly what they sound like; they are the appeals courts for every federal district court within their circuit. Circuit Courts' rulings must be followed in their subject districts. So when I argue in the Eastern District of New York, I look to the rulings of the Second Circuit for guidance on legal points. The Circuit Courts generally do *not* make findings of fact; they generally only rule on the law and accept whatever facts are established by the federal district courts. Decisions by the Circuits courts may be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), which may agree to consider the appeal or deny certification, which is what happened in the gay marriage case. SCOTUS is only required to hear a very few types of appeals (and, interestingly, SCOTUS is the original trial court for a very few number of disputes, notably disputes between States).

 

 

With regards to gay marriage rulings, it is important to remember that each Circuit Court makes rulings that affect every district court in its circuit but NOT district courts in other circuits. For example, one Circuit may interpret that the Constitution requires recognition of gay marriage, while another Circuit may not. What SCOTUS did in the gay marriage case is acknowledge that all Circuits THAT HAVE RULED ON THE ISSUE are currently in agreement on the point that the Constitution of the Untied States requires that each State recognize same-sex marriages. However, not all Circuit Courts have ruled on the issue and one may disagree. In this case, there would be what's called a split in the Circuits and SCOTUS is far more likely to take up an appeal if the Circuits have different interpretations of the Constitution or other federal-level law.

 

To further confuse you, each State has its own court system that is competent to rule on all laws, including federal law and the Constitution. The state courts' interpretations of federal law and the federal Constitution, however, are subject to the rulings by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Circuit in which the state falls (each state falls wholly within a single Circuit). Conversely, rulings of state law and on the state constitution by the higher courts in each state must be followed by the federal courts, including the Circuit Courts and SCOTUS, so long as the state laws do not conflict with federal law. But the interoperation of state and federal law is horribly complex, and probably even more boring to you than the rest of my post.

Edited October 8, 2014 by Mr. GOH!