No, seriously. Just like any system ours has loopholes and contradictions, we all know this. I think the left in America isn't focused enough on legislation that would almost certainly be challenged by SCOTUS which, in their decision, would open up an even bigger can of worms to overturn than to just keep in place.
I think the goal of this should not be to try and force a decision to uphold but rather to force them to swallow the poison pill and further harm the fascist project in the USA. Literally goad them into an overturning of whatever law you passed that requires such an opinion as to have broad sweeping repercussions. I don't have any ideas because I haven't thought much on it. However, I think there is some opportunity in this idea and enough people ruminating around it has potential.
It seems to me the rightwing kind of already engages in this. So why not the left? Isn't eroding the legal constructs of the capitalist state in our best interests?
All legislation in the U$A is written by corporate lobbyists. Anything else would never come to a vote.
So we currently have some opportunities in regards to money as speech and corporations as "persons". It seems to me that abusing these decisions to argue something like a corporation flagrantly violating sanctions as the government banning the free speech of a person is the right direction. Should the left have some plan to open a cooperative just to do business directly with Cuba or something? Complete with some legal counsel, of course?
I think thats rather hopeful on the courts operating on the facts and logic, and not on interests
That's the beauty of a poison pill legislation. They can act in either manner and you win.
with cuba i suspect they rather throw book at your "shipping to cuba, llc", consider you a terrorist (thus matter of national security without corporate free speech rights) and be done with it
I think getting something maybe done on a state or county level is more reasonable. But ultimately it involves writing a bill to do something positive but through a method conservatives use, like using the legal construct that all cities and counties serve at the behest of the state and the state can override them or something like that. The courts would then either have to side with the state and uphold that or side with the counties and cities overturning this precedent that was set decades ago.
Another would be changing wording of a bill that you know conservatives were going to pass in order to make it utilize some legal precedent that you might want lefty stuff to utilize. Then if one is challenged the other goes.
The thing is we already have a bunch of rulings that set bad precedent. We just don't have anyone out here to push them to the extreme or the funding to challenge those precedents when the government tries to say, "no, uh, we didn't mean like that." I put out the 'violating sanctions as a matter of free speech' test as one example.
Wisconsin governor Evers used the state's partial line item veto to edit the state's budget bill to cut RNC funding by removing a zero in $10,000,000 and fund Wisconsin public schools not for "2023-24 and 2024-25 school years" but "2023-2425 school years". The veto is meant to be used by governor's to cut budget line items but there's enough leeway to remove individual characters anywhere in the bill.
I see where you're coming from. Elect enough socialists/progressives to some state legislature such that they can pack a committee. When/ if a conservative piece of legislation comes through the committee, poison pill it with good stuff and hope it leads to a legal battle in the supreme court. To get to that point would require electing enough socialists/progressives. And those elected being disciplined enough to not break ranks (either through a single party or a strong coalition). I feel like if we got to that point the ruling class would actually see it as a threat and drop pretenses. You already see these huge well funded recall campaigns when a single progressive or socialist gets elected to a city council spot.
Yeah, a commitment to "transitional programmes" as the Trots call them would be nice, but you gotta be able to take advantage when the capitalists put the hammer down on your shoes for orphans campaign because it will decrease profits 2% next quarter.
