Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

What about when your particular state wants to deviate from the national norm on, say, drug policy or gay marriage (in favor)?



Several states already do that with legalized marijuana. The federal government has chosen not to get involved, so it's become a de facto state's right.


So, you're against states' rights, except when you agree with the particular policy the state is following in defiance of the federal government.

That's not a criticism of states' rights; that's a criticism of not agreeing with you. Join the club :-p


I was stating a fact. I didn't express my opinion of it one way or the other.

My point was that we already have examples where there are exceptions to federal law on a state-by-state basis. What I've been saying all along is that we should codify that system.


So "giving up on states rights" = codifying the system, and this:

>It's probably time to give up on the ridiculous sanctity of states' rights.

isn't an opinion? I'm lost.




Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: