#Constitutional

GIRDS

GIRD_S

Thank you for this important thread .@AnnaMeierPS! You make some essential points and we are huge fans of your work! Would disagree though with the framing of "anti-constitutional" as national

Aoife O'Donoghue

aoifemod

Me & 1/2 @mastermanmurray wrote about the permutations and combinations involved in #BorderPolls and the futures of the 2 islands here https://bit.ly/39f0f5l But a number of things beyond the technicalities of

Christopher Sprigman

CJSprigman

Great thread. I suspect that at least 5 Supreme Court justices would have helped Trump steal the election if the job were judicially do-able: i.e., it was possible to write

B. Thomas Hall

ThomasHall17

Claiming the PM is in "conflict of interest" in selecting a GG is constitutional nonsense. @erinotoole demonstrates ignorance of our constitutional conventions. The GG is NOT the PM's supervisor or

Ciaran Martin

ciaranmartinoxf

Among the many problems with this plan is that the proposed reforms are so far-reaching, they’d surely require a referendum 1/ 7https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jan/31/keir-starmer-urged-to-back-radical-con

Dan Rohde

DanEricRohde

Constitutional history is strange: in the US, UI is deemed constitutional due to its compromise btwn federal $$ with state admin; in Canada, federally financed and administered UI is deemed

Joseph Broadway 🕷

JoeBroadway_LFL

I had really hoped that, with everything else going on, this had gone away. The stupid name change hides the worrying drive behind this. The government wants less accountability. A

Seattle Independent

SeattleIndpdnt

Lost within the confession of Time magazine of the coordinated efforts to overturn the election is this: getting that many people to act can only occur with an extensive system

Seth Abramson

SethAbramson

What? What is Schumer *doing*? You don't *ever* have jurors vote on a dispositive question at the *start* of a trial, as you thereby insure that they will pay virtually

Kent Barnett

ProfKentBarnett

My guess without taking a deep dive into the issue: both the district court and the President can remove Berman. /1 The power of removal is incident to the power

Robert Saunders

redhistorian

This is an excellent article by @davidallengreen. Whatever the merits of a written constitution, it's not going to happen any time soon. So we need achievable changes that can be

President-Elect OverTheMoonbat⭐️⭐️⭐️

OverTheMoonbat

For 3-4 weeks I have held back on the CCP component in all of this because priority for overturning the election within the time constraints we have would reside with

Supriya Shrinate

SupriyaShrinate

Baffling. First fin secy tells Parl Panel can’t pay states’ share of GST now AG says Council can borrow. But Council includes both centre & states. Why must states borrow

Blair McDougall

blairmcdougall

With Davidson, Barnes & Tompkins away, all is not well with the Scottish Tories. Can Lab capitalise? We could but it requires reframing our role in the election. The Tories

Michael Dougan

mdouganlpool

I used to be relatively cautious about need for major constitutional reform. But as existing system falls apart under pressure from unprincipled, power-greedy charlatans, we see full dangers of unwritten

corey robin

CoreyRobin

I should add that THOUGH THIS NEEDN'T BE THE CASE, one of the big problems of the fascism discourse, because it is so focused on things like right-wing populism and

By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.