| General > General Technical Chat |
| EU mandantory chat control |
| << < (8/32) > >> |
| Simon:
--- Quote from: magic on May 15, 2022, 07:12:04 am --- --- Quote from: eugene on May 14, 2022, 11:57:57 pm ---Back to the distinction between legislation and enforcement: does the EU have its own police and courts, or is that left entirely to the individual countries. --- End quote --- Thankfully an EU police doesn't exist yet :phew: But, Every country is obliged to implement and enforce whatever "EU laws" are established following official procedures. The EU and many member states will be happy to put political pressure on any outliers that refuse to do so. The general climate in the world today is that mainstream parties are happy to adopt certain kinds of policies, whether dictated from "above" or on their own initiative. --- End quote --- You seem to have an agenda of your own here. If a group of countries decide to tie themselves together and adopt similar laws so that they operate in a similar way and can work together then no it's not a case of pressure on outlier countries but that those countries have already signed up to obligations that they are not following through on in the same way that you would expect your local police force to go after criminals who break the law so do your partners. You make a pact, you stick to it. |
| jpanhalt:
--- Quote from: Simon on May 15, 2022, 07:01:22 am --- If you take the recent row about abortion law several states are ready to ban it if the ruling that abortions are to be allowed is overturned, this kind of tells me that a state makes laws within the framework of what the layer of legal system above dictates. I can't remember if other states would still allow abortions but this could also amount to the the rule being that you can allow them, or that you can ban them but not an all one way policy allowing individual states to have a one way choice but not a two way one ie complete independence. --- End quote --- The 10th Amendment in America's Bill of Rights is important in that discussion (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution ) --- Quote ---The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. --- End quote --- In direct answer to your question, overruling Roe v. Wade would allow each state to set its own laws regarding abortion. That was the situation before Roe. Justice Harry Blackmun wrote the opinion. His logic was considered to be on very weak ground from the beginning. Some trivia: Justice Blackmun was previously general counsel at the Mayo Clinic, which was extremely closely associated with St. Mary's Hospital in Rochester, MN. St. Mary's is a Catholic hospital and does not allow abortions. Background: Only specific powers were delegated to the Federal government by the Constitution. That was intentionally done to limit it. Our original government was under The Articles of Confederation. That had very weak central authority and failed. It could not effectively tax or print money. The Constitution and our republic were formed in response. Nevertheless, the desire to maintain relative independence of the states was quite strong. As an aside, the Commerce Clause of our Constitution, as innocuous as it may seem at first glance, has been used extensively to expand the powers of the Federal government. |
| MadScientist:
Clearly the Brexit BS,ers are out in force spreading more lies The EU commission draws up legislative proposals as it is in effect the EU s civil service , in the case of ordinary law , the proposal must be jointly passed by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union ( often called the Council of ministers ) neither body under normal situations can make laws independent of the other . “ Brussels “ contrary to Brexit BS”er does not make community law. Both groups are democratically selected albeit in different ways , the ministers are all elected domestically whereas the EU parliament is by direct election , contrary to Brexit BS , there is no “ unaccountable “ law making process. Qualified majority voting exists in most cases to decisions by the council of ministers , so it’s difficult to get contentious proposals passed. An EU law may be proposed as a regulation or a directive. A regulation must be translated verbatim in to national law whereas a directive can leave national authorities freedom to decide how to implement the principle of the directive. The U.K. government continuously abused thd process by “ gold plating “ EU directives often making them much harsher then intended and of course it was famous for using the EU law making process to get laws in effect in the U.K. that it could not get through its own parliament ( particulaly intelligence spying laws ) So European Parliament resolutions in themselves are like “ private members bills “ they have virtually zero chance of becoming law. Again the European Commission is a civil service unlike the US there is no administration with law making ability. The commission does not make community law. The EU is a confederation of sovereign nations that agree by treaty to devolve certain aspects of national law making to the EU law making processes. EU law only has validity in member states as long as it’s consistent with the principles enshrined in the treaties. Ireland for example has a referendum on every treaty so signed since the 80s. Ireland for example has specific European codicils on neutrality , on NI status etc. No Eu law can change that situation |
| MadScientist:
--- Quote from: langwadt on May 15, 2022, 12:56:38 am --- --- Quote from: eugene on May 14, 2022, 11:57:57 pm --- --- Quote from: tom66 on May 14, 2022, 10:50:30 am --- --- Quote from: eugene on May 13, 2022, 03:57:53 pm ---So the independent EU countries are not only bound to laws written by the EU Commission, but are required to use their own criminal justice system to enforce those laws? That seems wrong to me ideologically. But I suppose if everyone agrees to it... --- End quote --- Once again, the laws are passed by the parliament and not the commission. --- End quote --- Please forgive my ignorance of how things are done in the EU (even the US for that matter.) When you mention 'parliament', is that an EU parliament, or parliaments of individual countries? --- End quote --- commission writes the laws, parliament votes on adopting the laws parliament members are elected in each countries --- End quote --- This is only half the process |
| MadScientist:
--- Quote from: jpanhalt on May 15, 2022, 09:41:17 am --- --- Quote from: Simon on May 15, 2022, 07:01:22 am --- If you take the recent row about abortion law several states are ready to ban it if the ruling that abortions are to be allowed is overturned, this kind of tells me that a state makes laws within the framework of what the layer of legal system above dictates. I can't remember if other states would still allow abortions but this could also amount to the the rule being that you can allow them, or that you can ban them but not an all one way policy allowing individual states to have a one way choice but not a two way one ie complete independence. --- End quote --- The 10th Amendment in America's Bill of Rights is important in that discussion (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution ) --- Quote ---The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. --- End quote --- In direct answer to your question, overruling Roe v. Wade would allow each state to set its own laws regarding abortion. That was the situation before Roe. Justice Harry Blackmun wrote the opinion. His logic was considered to be on very weak ground from the beginning. Some trivia: Justice Blackmun was previously general counsel at the Mayo Clinic, which was extremely closely associated with St. Mary's Hospital in Rochester, MN. St. Mary's is a Catholic hospital and does not allow abortions. Background: Only specific powers were delegated to the Federal government by the Constitution. That was intentionally done to limit it. Our original government was under The Articles of Confederation. That had very weak central authority and failed. It could not effectively tax or print money. The Constitution and our republic were formed in response. Nevertheless, the desire to maintain relative independence of the states was quite strong. As an aside, the Commerce Clause of our Constitution, as innocuous as it may seem at first glance, has been used extensively to expand the powers of the Federal government. --- End quote --- I read the preliminary judgement paper, while I am a proponent of women’s rights I also acknowledge that Rode v Wade was based on some very peculiar and particular Supreme Court interpretations at the time ( similar to More recent 2nd amendment judgements ) hence it’s hard to argue for the support of the 77 decision. The preliminary paper basically says the US constitution had no commentary on abortion and therefore federal rules have no place and the individual states them selves should decide. This is not unlike the situation in the EU where such matters are by dint of the treaties left entirely at the behest of national governments. People can of course choose where they live within these national frameworks so you can pick the one you like! |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |