We'll have to arrange some kind of post wwII Berlin level air campaign to support Austin.
Every 15 minutes a C130 land fully stocked with Trader Joes Chili lime rolled tortilla chips, apple cider, and Joe's O's.
We'll have to arrange some kind of post wwII Berlin level air campaign to support Austin.
Every 15 minutes a C130 land fully stocked with Trader Joes Chili lime rolled tortilla chips, apple cider, and Joe's O's.
And drop brown bags filled with shit on Ted Cruz and Albots property on the way back. Time management maximized.
Yeah, heading into the 2018 midterm Trump tried to create a border crisis. It didn't work. This is their election trick, create a lot of smoke, rile up the base, think that it will rile everyone else up.
I mean let's look at the core aspect of Abbott's argument from his statement.
That is why the Framers included both Article IV, § 4, which promises that the federal government “shall protect each [State] against invasion,” and Article I, § 10, Clause 3, which acknowledges “the States’ sovereign interest in protecting their borders.” Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387, 419 (2012) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
Right out the gate, Abbott is based his ideology on a dissenting opinion. That is, the NON-MAJORITY finding of the court in Arizona v. United States. In fact, Arizona v. United States indicated explicitly that enforcement of the border was the sole privilege of the Federal Government. So right out the gate Abbott is literally using a case that ruled the opposite of the determination he indicated in his statement.
Additionally, Art. I, § 10, C. 3 of the Constitution.
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
Historically this was used for Native American invasions of property and so the key factor in cases around this is "will not admit of delay". Texas is not burning. No historical read of this section of the Constitution supports immigrants coming into the Nation. By definition as we have it thus far, Texas is not being invaded. Additionally, Scalia's conceptualization of this section, no other Justice has joined in on that understanding. So outside of the opinion of a single justice, a Governor just saying "I'm being invaded! I get to invalidate federal law!" nobody else has ever indicated this is the way it should be read.
With Art. I, § 10, C. 3, you can say "I'm being invaded!" But you still have to follow the law. You can fight invaders and maintain the law of this land, they are not mutually exclusive things, no matter how hard Abbott or Scalia wishes it to be otherwise.
And finally, the Art. IV, § 4 argument.
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
Again, no court would uphold that Texas is being invaded. But Abbott is adamant about Biden "isn't enforcing…" And the thing is, Governors do not get to legally make that determination. What laws are and are not being enforced by a President is the sole prerogative of the Executive branch. (Wayte v. United States)
The Governor of Texas cannot just unilaterally make a determination that the President isn't XYZing. That's what the court system is for and distinctly the thing that Abbott has lost. If the Governor felt that the President was not holding up their end, they have every right under Article III of the Constitution to take it up there. Which that's what Abbott did and lost. Also, why when he was questioned if his defiance would be upheld by SCOTUS, he merely indicated that he felt the 5th Circuit would uphold it. Meaning, he knows that SCOTUS will overturn any determination the Governor is making on this front.
And with all of that, his core argument has nothing. It's easy to pick apart. Now here's the thing, Gov. Abbott is not stupid in the legal sense. He's quite aware that his determination is unfounded. He's banking on stirring the pot enough to make either Biden do something so that can be plastered all over the place or getting the issue fresh into his base's minds.
And like I said, this is exactly what they did 2018 and lost. Abbott is just trying to get under everyone's skin and he seems determined to spend as much of Texan taxpayers' money in litigation to do that one thing.
Again, no court would uphold that Texas is being invaded.
Which is good because if we classify border-crossing migrants as "invaders" then not only does that mean really bad things for them, it means Abbott was funneling invaders further inside our borders by paying to bus them to denver or fly them to chicago or whatever else.
It's pretty clear he didn't think the treasonous implications of this particular initiative through very well.
Please, leave. Don't come crying to us the next time your electrical grid gets overwhelmed.
Hey! Y'all used to rely on us to kick-start y'all's power grids! Back in the '70s and '80s! Back when racism and cocaine reigned supreme!
Now y'all are all like, "ew, why is that racist coke-head talking to me?" Well, it's cuz you're woke or something!
Hey! Listen to me and stop walking away! Why are you taking our American flags?? Hello?
Speaking of power grids, have fun trying to keep yours maintained once you secede, Texas. It barely works as it is now.
I bet it'll run just fine on thoughts and prayers. Good luck to you, ya Yankee heathen!
Oh shoot, my lights ran out of thoughts — gotta switch to the backup prayers...
I'm in favor of calling the bluff, but leave it peaceful:
They'll be crying and begging to rejoin the US within a month. They'll be a fourth world hell scape within a year if they don't.
This is basically what happened at the beginning of the civil war except the south had much better terms, and the confederates decided to attack a US army base because they're assholes and that's what assholes do. They would absolutely do the same again.
The power dynamic has shifted so much that it would be a 1000x speedrun if they did it again.
And honestly? Let them. Maybe we can do reconstruction properly this time.
The US civil war isn't what civil wars look like in the modern context. There was a boarder and most of the North was safe. That's not what modern civil wars look like. They look like Serbia.
You have to go to work and on your way to work there's someone who's been sniping people for months. The cops won't do anything because "let's go Brandon" or some shit, the mayor no longer has control over the police, and you still have to go to work because you still have to pay for food. So you duck and weave between cars with rotting drivers to get in to your office and you hope you don't get killed today.
Modern civil wars have no borders. They look like mass shootings, car attacks, snipers, bombings, and other random terrorism. Or they look like the Syrian civil war, with 30 different groups all fighting each other aligning with each other sometimes and fighting others, for decades, sometimes aligned with the government and sometimes against it.
The key thing about Texas is that they have a ton of oil. Even assuming a normal war, the US military lives off oil. If it was quick they could probably do it without dipping in to strategic reserves, but what would happen to the oil infrastructure at the start of the war? Damaging that supply could impact the US ability to wage war, so that's not a risk they're going to take.
If anything comes of this beyond Republicans using it to pump up their base, I'll be surprised.
Texas immediately becomes the newest Narco-State, gets it's own CIA coup and Democrats refuse to make them a state again, forcing them to be a territory.
Set Texas adrift and you'll see some real invaders from the south.
That would be the 'finding out' part.
Oh man, the cartels would love to hit that from behind.
I say let them leave, make PR the 50th state, and then immediately invade Texas and turn it into a territory of the US.
Biden has immunity. He should just order seal team 6 to execute Texas political leadership.
I really want for someone to call it out and be like "OK, FINE, SECEDE. GO AHEAD!" and just watch the idiots back down.
As someone who actually lives here, I would be very hard pressed to find someone who actually thinks secession is a good idea. It has been years since I've met someone who didn't consider it anything more than a joke or bit of (false) trivia.
Be aware that Lemmy is a pretty radically legt place. It isn't where to go if you want nuanced takes on stupid conservative talking points.
Why would anyone want nuanced takes on stupid conservative talking points? They're not worth listening to because they're not grounded in reality or knowledge of how the world works.
Rural Texas can be pretty crazy. Cities and the immediate surrounding areas are pretty normal and liberal.
I say this all the time, but that's everywhere in the US. When I first moved to Pennsylvania, a friend told me that it was Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, with Alabama in between. Then, later, we moved to Minnesota, and it was the same thing: The Cities, a couple of outliers like Duluth and the college towns, but MAGA signs everywhere else.
If the electoral college didn't make elections so unfair, politics in the US would be more sane, and more liberal.
As a Texan who wants nothing to do with these absolute fucking morons, but whose life is directly impacted by their asinine whims: please don't encourage them. I can't afford to leave yet.
I don't get why Biden doesn't do this. The fear is abott will say government over reach and that will be a talking point for the election? How about strong father figure, who enforced the law to keep us united?
You can't let what Republicans say dictate what you do
No matter what Biden does, they're going to do what they're going to do.
Even if he doesn't do the right thing now, they'll just lie some more and do it anyways.
“Meet me in the middle,” says the unjust man.
You take a step towards him. He takes a step back.
“Meet me in the middle,” says the unjust man.
— A. R. Moxon
I see you've negotiated with Republicans before.
Malignant narcissist parents. I got started early.
I checked the reaction in r/conservative, and everyone there was supporting Texas on this smh
When weren't they enemies of the USA?
To the surprise of exactly nobody.
Gonna be hard to get that FEMA money Texas needs every few years once they secede.
Probably the best example of irony you’ll ever see: Texas becomes SAFER when illegal immigration increases. Sauce: https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2014704117
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.