sTaTeS rIgHts *
*does not apply to Democrats or people trying to protect human rights within a state if it conflicts with right wing authoritarians' vision for how everyone else should live.
this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2025
187 points (98.4% liked)
politics
26681 readers
2090 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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Republicans have always been hypocrites.
Good thing executive orders are not laws.
Not how this works.
It is now
And suddenly, State Republicans are fine with having the Federal government take away their rights.
Well no, because this order has zero legal weight. They are liars, though, for pretending it does.
Conservatives have always been fine with federal government taking away other states rights.
The civil war started because the South didn't want the federal government to force them to stop using slaves but 100% okay with the federal government forcing Northern states to return slaves back to the South.
The cons whine about things like gender fluidity, but they've always been quite morally fluid, let's say....
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this effectively toothless? Like executive orders only effect things directly under federal and more specifically executive purview meaning even a city government could pass a regulation on AI in their area and it'd have more legal weight than an executive order. Or are they abusing unrelated powers to declare that no one can regulate AI?
Like I'm pretty sure the supremacy clause doesn't apply to executive orders.
Yes, you are correct. A federal law would preempt a state law, usually. But this is not a federal law, so it's a load of kindling.
So are they saying AI is a national security threat? Or that living without AI is a national security threat, in which one would imagine AI should be provided free access by the federal government to every person, as it is a threat to not have access? As an executive order is designed to be used only for an issue of national security, which we must have been living in such a threat since the country was founded until now.
Let me get this straight. AI now has more rights than we do?
Since AI is being created within private tyrannies we call "corporations", which also have more rights than we do, it's only natural.
Pretty sure it always did
Remember all the movies that said we would bully them? They hadn't factored in the "economy".
Id imagine this may get thrown out in court
He's trying to rule by decree, but most of his orders are for things he has no authority to do.
They should be printed on soft paper so at least someone could wipe their ass with them.
Ya even with our conservative court they even can’t ignore the power states have in enforcing their own laws outside of what the constitution specifically says the federal controls. I guess that assumes if any of them even care about the constitution anymore.
This is almost certainly because this very thin economy, or at least the stock market, is only barely staying afloat on the back of the AI bubble. This move could create room for them to superficially extend the bubble as long as possible and maximize their profits.
"Let's push something that destroys the ecology and economy! We'll call it "AI"! People everywhere will be jobless and suffering except for us!". The world, with usa as a superpower, is very badly broken. Maybe it's time to drop off the usa at the old folks home.
State rights much?
Executive orders don't apply to states. States are not federal employees
What about States rights?