politics

18966 readers

5 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

432

Texas’ Border Stunt Is Based on the Same Legal Theory Confederate States Used to Secede (www.thedailybeast.com)

submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

51 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A clash between Texas and the Biden administration over who controls the Texas-Mexico border continues to escalate this week as federal officials once again demanded the state give Border Patrol agents access to a park that is a popular corridor for migrants to enter the United States illegally.

This comes in response to a recent Supreme Court decision, where the court allowed federal officials to dismantle a wire barrier along the border, prompting a legal battle initiated by Texas. Texas argued that this action, aimed at aiding migrants, infringes on state sovereignty and damages Texas security measures.

In response to this decision, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott released a letter arguing that Texas has a right to control the border and that it supersedes federal government control. Abbott’s accusation that the federal government has breached the Constitution by having “broken the compact between the United States and the States” is almost identical to South Carolina’s 1860 declaration of secession.

Furthermore, Abbott’s letter espouses the fringe theory of constitutional law known as “compact theory,” popularized by Confederate states during the Civil War era and supported by Confederate President Jefferson Davis.

no comments (yet)

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

there doesn't seem to be anything here