volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
You say this, and yet when I tune in to Republican media today they're really emphasizing the need to crack down on exploitation of immigrant children.
Commentators are emphasizing it after legislators in their committee meetings publicly criticized administration officials for their supposed roles in allowing or even promoting child exploitation of immigrants coming over the borders.
It's a case of how people live in two different worlds these days.
They didn't just ban trans kids from sports.
And I'm not sure what you think legislators are going to do about Chinese police stations. That's more of an executive branch issue to respond to.
Well, their obsession comes from Hunter's really over the top appearance of impropriety, that not only does it seem like the guy did some bad things and broke some serious laws, but the administration is keeping him in the spotlight instead of downplaying his role in the story of the Biden presidency.
Normally you distance from someone who's such a lightning rod, but in this case they're keeping the figure going.
It seems a bit staged, really: the administration keeps him around for opponents to react to, and opponents play their part in doing just that.
Don't forget the song Highwayman, famously covered by the The Highwaymen, the country supergroup including Johnny Cash, Waylon Jennings, Willie Nelson, and Kris Kristofferson:
"Many a young maid lost her baubles to my trade"
Wait, what specific quid pro quo?
Yeah, answering your questions while linking to the text of the actual case is where you draw the line *eyeroll*
Different levels of the US court system operate in different ways. The judge pointed out the FDA's violation of law, that he was fairly bound to point out.
SCOTUS has more freedom to pull the ripcord, so I figured they would.
Yeah, but based on the above discussion, it doesn't sound like it actually is.
Especially once the overlaying big cookie consent popups are normalized, as they are now, they become not so exaggerated, but just the accepted cost of routine and effective web engineering in that regulatory environment.
By law and regulation the FDA has certain procedures to follow before approving a drug, and if anyone has questions about it, again by law the FDA has certain procedures for answering the challenge.
Congress set up these laws, and can change them if they're in need of change.
So, in this case the FDA itself failed to follow those procedures for over twenty years, leading to this mess.
No, courts are not supposed to be directing medical studies because that's outside the area of expertise of a judge.
Here's the Texas opinion that lays this all out:
The funny thing is that as a longtime follower of The Federalist Society, I've seen how critical they've long been of conservatism.
it almost ends up sounding like gaslighting.
Of the countless hours that FedSoc presentations have spent taking down conservative positions... wait, they're supposed to be conservatives now?
I think a lot of this idea is promoted by people who haven't actually listened to content from the organization.
@digital_wyrm@mastodon.online
Yay echo chambers!
PS: But we need to be clear that that's what's happening.
Courts do sometimes ignore broken law, but we need to call that out as we demand reforms to the law to fix them.
The Texas judge seemed to also expect exactly this. He was bound by precedent himself, so he opened a window for higher courts, with more freedom, to break that glass.
Congress needs to fix this. So far I don't think anyone is pressing the case with the people who actually have the fix.
If I didn't say it above, Justices are subject to the same rules as the rest of us. If a justice in his private life is caught speeding, he still gets a fine. It's between him and cops, but has nothing to do with Congress.
YES, as long as a justice's work product is good, then he's OK to remain in the job. That's what the US government hired him to do, so he's fulfilling his side of that employment obligations.
You bring up the problem of work quality being subjective, but we've solved that problem: Congress is free to judge, subjectively, work quality as they represent all of us and remove justices who fail. Legislative processes are all about sorting out subjective judgments.
So yep, so long as the justice is doing good work, I have zero care about anything in his personal life. Why should I?
Good work for the US is good work.
Yeah, Congress can pass whatever laws they want, but unconstitutional laws are unenforcable.
Congress cannot legally exert power over the judicial branch as the US Constitution demands a firewall to enforce judicial independence.
Congress cannot expect to enforce unconstitutional laws, whether to deprive you of your rights or to breach judicial independence for the exact same reason:
If Congress had power over the courts then they'd be able to exact rulings that take away your rights as they see fit.
You do know the job of a Supreme Court justice is not to report on the GOP... right?
Like, you know those are different career paths that do completely different jobs in different institutions with different rules and different checks on their roles in society?
But most directly, journalists appeal to the public. Justices appeal to the legal institution and to Congress. Completely different interests involved.
I can go on and on about how illogical that comparison is, about how those apples and oranges are worlds apart.
I expected it.
The problem is that the FDA made such a mess of things with their 20 year delay that courts would feel the need to break the glass, ignore the law, and just put judges'/justices' notions of common sense above the rules.
Sometimes the court system just bails out and says, no, this is too stupid, obviously we need to just ignore the rules.
It's already been pointed out that the accusations of Thomas breaking the law are false for multiple reasons, not the least being that judicial independence limits the ability of Congress to interfere with the coequal branch of government.
If Congress wants to impeach a justice, they're welcome to do so. But that's really their only way of policing the Court.
Any other effort to influence the Court threatens judicial independence.
We have to take the bad along with the good of having an independent judiciary.
But again, Supreme Court justices publish their opinions in the open so we have an especially clear view of their work, that we can judge them based on.
Hell, if a justice is being bribed to do a good job, then for goodness sake, let's have more bribery!
It is the quality of the work that matters here, not whatever is going on in the official's private life.
It's a problem that these threats to their privacy threaten to interfere with their ability to do good work for the country.
When Musk sets up a press agency that takes government money without labeling it, then you'd have a point.
But the conflicts of interest being labeled here just aren't the same between a press agency and a car company.
I never questioned your cred.
But I do remember once being told that the #ActivityPub protocol might be open to cross-service identity just because of how it handles account addressing and certificates.
With id, WebFinger, and other things already baked into ActivityPub and/or implementations, ids can be separated from instances.
So supposedly support for the functionality is already in there, whether intentionally or not. It just takes implementers figuring out the best way to make it work.
@J12t@social.coop
It's not so simple as disclosure good, concealment bad. There are a ton of areas where disclosure is not particularly warranted, ranging from appropriate state secrets through simple matters of privacy.
I actually think we need to value the idea that public officials deserve respect for their privacy in part as emphasizing government for the people.
These are still mere citizens serving the country. And heck, if we value their privacy that helps them have skin in the game should they start itching to compromise ours.
So sure, hold public officials to high standards *based on their job performance* not based on looking for dirt in their private lives.
And for goodness sake, let's maintain the independence of the judiciary. Congress should not be crossing that line.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
