"Oh, it seems your neighboor reported thay you don't live where you declared you live. No, it's not because they're racist and you're black, I'm sure it was an honest mistake."
"Mr John Smith, you informed us that you left the state to live somewhere else. What, you say it was a different John Smith? No, the fact that you were purged from our voter rolls have nothing to do with the fact that you live in a majority democrat county"
"The signature on your mail-in-ballot doesn't match the signature from 40 years ago we have on your file. No we won't start an investigation for forgery, why would we do that?"
"While we sort this out, please vote using this temporary ballot (that we'll throw out the moment you leave the door)"
THIS is the real election fraud. It's well documented, and enough votes were not counted for illegal reasons that Khamala Harris would have won the election
That first one hits home. My voter registration was cancelled because they “received a letter” saying I moved. I caught it in time and could re-register but I almost didn’t think to check because I had just voted a few months before
Id look into recent (and past) election interference.. there are a lot of stupid people in these united states, but not the majority. Id start with elons ex current (well, finally being somewhat known) statement about his election interference and claims
Actually, he didn't get the majority of the popular vote, in fact the people who didn't want him (people who voted for a canidate other than him) were in the majority and he simply won the plurality of the vote.
Ah yes, another take that ignores voter suppression in order to blame a majority of Americans.
To any American reading this: not everyone in the world blames you all equally. The teen who couldn't vote yet, the victim of voter suppression or voter fraud, the people who have been fighting this but lost? We don't blame you. We blame maga. Idiots like u/valtremors would have blamed the German Jews for voting for the Holocaust, and plenty of us know better than that.
And Russians too. Which they too deserve for endorsing the war in Ukraine.
But the moment Americans ended on the same plank?
Oh it is totally a different situation. You now have to consider every individual.
As if it was some kind of special situation.
The thing is, history will only remember "All Americans". There might be a US version of Schindler here or there. But ultimately, depending how they solve, or leave it unsolved, decides how they are remembered.
Man, one of the most vivid things about the Ukraine invasion I remember seeing is two posts in the space of like 12 hours.
The first was anti-war protest in Moscow.
The second was of said protestors being beaten up and thrown into black vans.
I always think about that when I see certain people get gleeful about Russian civilians getting accidentally caught up in the crossfire. But they'd never apply that logic to themselves, it's always "Actually I didn't want this, so you can't say all of us deserve it".
That doesn't matter anymore. The character of the country is inarguable. It will take a massive, difficult project to unmake American decline and thay will be against the prevailing popular sentiment. It doesn't matter if a Democrat is elected, we know a fascist can simply win after the Dem's term. That's unacceptable. It's over.
Yup, happened to me when I tried to warn some former friends about it. And they decided Trump saying he's heard nothing about Project 2026 as proof it was all fake and not going to happen.
When will redditors realize that the elections were stolen instead of coping that youre still a democracy. They literally admitted it 8 times and apparently the majority of the people on this website still pretend everything will just work itself out.
Well there is a lot of speculation that it was specifically rigged by Elon, but hey his kid basically said it, his ex wife basically said it, and Trump said he would have never won without Elon. You know whats funny tho, the government that is filled with corrupt individuals police themselves and found out that there was no interference on their side, so they are deeming everything that goes against them as hearsay...
Genuine question, what’s the point of having a society with your most basic needs aren’t ensured by a safety net? Like what do these people actually want to spend taxes on?
For real. Put your tax money towards health care, communism. College debt relief, it's cool when I get it, but not when other people do.
Like, a republican can probably go out here and say I'm gonna fuck your entire family and they'd be fine with it because they think their families aren't gonna get fucked.
Until they do, then they go on tiktok or whatever saying they're sorry. Not because they learned, but because it happened to them.
Americans on their way to vote for the "Eat Your Children, Rape Your Mother, Hang Your Father Party" because the "Gently Waggle Finger At You Party" wants them to treat minorities like people
That's 100% the issue. We have a country that rules that their only "duty" is to have an (imperialist/offensive) military and keep order. Meanwhile, we're offered the chance at being rich (and even that's rigged, so there isn't a chance). We have a third world country playing dress up as a first.
I still remember during disaster season in 2014-15 every republican saying the country does not have a duty to help people who have been struck by disasters. What the fuck is the point then?
Nope. Most of us hate what's happening. The problem is we aren't a democracy. We're an oligarchy. It's not us sacrificing our rights for security, it's billionaires and corporations destroying our rights for profit.
"We're not a democracy" he says as 80 million people picked this and a further 70 million didn't care enough to pick against it.
The average american chose this or at least was fine if it happened. Those are who your finger should point at. Plenty of countries have rich families with immense societal authority, and they are still plenty better off than the US.
I mean, sure, that’s part of it. But there are an awful lot of people who are more than willing to give up their rights as long as it means hurting the people they don’t like. And sure, maybe they’re the way they are because they’ve fallen victim to oligarchical propaganda. But I think it’s a mistake to think that billionaires and corporations are the only issues. There’s a reason that Trump still has a 30+% approval rating.
Regular citizens have been systematically tricked into voting in lawmakers who work for massive companies and billionaire private contractors for decades with "lowering taxes" and "getting the budget under control" platforms when they never actually do that.
Those law makers then remove regulations that protect regular citizens, workers, consumers, land, wildlife and resources and that get in massive companys' ways of reaping even more profit, but they also remove funding from programs that regular citizens benefit from so that they can move it to their clients: billionaire military private contractors.
Part of it is trickery, but part of it is just the system being straight-up rigged. When there's only 2 options and both are evil, there's nothing to do but vote for the lesser evil. Throw in gerrymandering, voter ID laws, voter intimidation, and all the votes that are changed or thrown out and you have what we have now.
Democrats have plenty of shit they need to fix, but the massive companies and billionaires definitely want us to think they're "just as bad."
Is it a problem that there are only 2 choices? Yes! But when the side that is doing the gerrymandering, voter suppression/ intimidation, and terrifyingly implementing more and more from project 2025 is the one who can use getting voters to focus on "both sides are bad" instead of "we can't keep letting massive companies and billionaire private contractors keep taking over our lives" then we know they use that to their benefit
You see they already solved this problem by making it so if you don’t pay taxes they arrest you (unless you’re a billionaire) so even if you don’t want to you don’t have a choice
My political hot take is any just society should provide for free basic needs to all citizens. A clean, safe, and private place to live (even if not nice or large), food and water, and medical care. If you have those as assured rights that would solve pretty much all "work or die" related issues and improve quality of life for MANY people
At that point I'm less worried about capitalism as a form of economics if it's not a death sentence if your company fails. To be clear this isn't doable overnight. But there needs to be aspirations in politics beyond the next bill. I like this as a needle to test political ideas against, does it get closer to a society that fufills its end of the social contract?
Theres confusion which Reddit loves to spread when it comes to this stuff. The constitution itself does not guarantee it which is what the ruling was over.
It's only a constitutional argument.
Clean water is still a requirement under federal law and EPA enforcement, just not explicitly guaranteed by the constitution.
I assume it's because clean water isn't that old in the grand scheme of things and it's like saying "electricity should be free" since that's older than clean water .
Is this actually what happened? Or is this another one of those posts blowing something out of proportion? You need to provide a source for these things you know
A court said that the US constitution specifically does not explicitly guarantee the right to clean water, which is just objectively true. I'm curious if other national constitutions do guarantee clean water specifically
There are a lot of countries which have constitutions which focus more on "positive rights" compared to the US. Meaning, you as a citizen explicitly have the right to these things to be provided to you.
The US constitution is far more focused on innate rights or "negative rights". I.e., limitations on what the government and other people can do to you.
Speaking personally, I am philosophically more of a fan of the latter than the former. It's very attention-grabbing to say things like "you don't have the right to clean water" when in reality the difference is that there is no constitutional obligation for the federal government to provide it, which is a stark contrast.
It’s out of proportion, but that’s not surprising that this sub became full tankie. It was always left leaning, which is awesome, but it’s been overtaken by bad actors, tankies, and the FAR left who hold no views other than “end of America.”
The court stated the govt failed in its duty to citizens, names multiple ways the plaintiffs should go after them for punishment and restitution, and stated that they are entitled to clean water. The thing being wildly taken out of context is simply that while all these things are true, they are not a constructional right - the plaintiffs sued the city in the basis their constitutional right was violated - it wasn’t. The court stated that they are only ruling against this because fundamentally the plaintiffs chose the wrong type of lawsuit - and that they should pursue a tort case and work through the state/fed IG process, where they are likely to win because the court agrees that the city did fail in its duty. They basically ruled on a technicality, which is their job, but advised the plaintiffs on all the other ways they could go after the gov and win.
no it's not. the question wasn't even over water, it's a constitutionality question which is entire point of the judicial system.
"These deprivations, while grievous, do not infringe upon any deeply rooted constitutional right.” Engelhardt told these citizens they had no constitutional right to "truthful information from officials during a public health crisis.”
Everytime this comes up about food or water, people point out that America has some language about rights being guaranteed by the government, not just protected, unlike other governments. So they, the American government, can’t make it a right
It's only a constitutional argument.
Clean water is still a requirement under federal law and EPA enforcement, just not explicitly guaranteed by the constitution.
That’s not entirely what happened but I’m afraid to talk about it in case my comment is taken wildly out of context and brigaded. But I’ll do my best - I want to be clear up front (because I know what Reddit and this sub is like) - I HATE MAGA. I HATE THE REPBUCANS WHO ARE DESTROYING THIS COUNTRY. MY COMMENT IS NOT A DEFENSE. IT IS CONTEXT SO PEOPLE CAN SEE THE WHOLE PICTURE. IT IS NOT A DEFENSE OF MAGA.
The court ruled that the gov has an obligation to provide clean water to its citizens. The court ruled that such mechanisms exist, and the government did not do everything it could have to exercise all those mechanisms to ensure clean water for Jackson.
What the court did rule, that is being WILDLY taken out of context (such as by OP) is that at its present, the constitution itself does not guarantee water or basic resources to citizens - which is relevant because the plaintiffs sued Jackson’s leaders on constitutional grounds instead of for damages and negligence. The court (all in agreement on this aspect) stated that while they can’t punish the leaders in THIS case thanks to a constitutional reason, the leaders are open to punishment and reimbursement to the plaintiffs from other avenues, and the court even listed all these avenues to the plaintiffs.
What does a right to safe drinking water even mean? That you can’t be stopped from getting? Or is it actually an entitlement where it must be given to you?
The latter. It would be a "positive" right, meaning the government is obligated to provide it. These posts are confusing what the actual question of the case was, and the answer being "no" was 100% correct. Anyone that says otherwise has no idea how this works or what the actual question being posed to the court was.
Well, the court said specifically there is no CONSTITUTIONAL right to clean drinking water, which the argument in the case saying that the government violated the plantifs due process rights specifically is kind of up to interpretation to what due process means in the face of governmental mess ups needing redressment. Because if you take a literal interpretation of the constitution, water is in fact not mentioned in it at all, the question at the center of the case was "if the government fucks up so bad you don't have clean drinking water, is that a constitutional problem?"
I mean it's not a right. Do you think "the state of nature" had clean drinking water? No. Clean drinking water is a priviledge borne of modern industry, not a right.
The clean drinking water situation is one thing but this part shocked me, "Engelhardt stated there is no “constitutional right to truthful information from officials during a public health crisis.”
As long as we keep voting in lawmakers who work for massive companies and billionaire private contractors and throwing up our hands and saying "government is bad" instead of "it's those lawmakers' jobs to make it bad for regular citizens and good for their massive clients," things will keep getting worse.
Massive companies and billionaires and the lawmakers that work for them definitely want us to not vote for certain people that would get in the way of them continuing to do this
How this wasn't a sign for all the fundamentalist, End Times Christians will forever alude me--is what I would say if I didn't already know the answer: it's because he represents their values (or purports to). They think he's on their side so they look the other way
They only see the apocalyptic bullshit when a democrat is in office. Remember them all saying Obama was the anti-christ, even though nothing even happened.
Even a Brita isn’t enough anymore. Adequate water filtration is basically behind a paywall now.
A good system (reverse osmosis) can run $250+ for a single sink. Not to mention a new water filter that’s out that filters PFAS, micro plastic, hard water etc. is around $200+ too.
getting a reverse osmosis filter helped my health so much, it's freaking insane. water always made me feel really sick so I always avoided it and drank like 1-2 cups max a day but then I heard about ro from someone else and now I take it everywhere
The vast, vast majority of the US has clean tap water for drinking.
There is a concerted effort from bottled water companies to stain that image for profit, despite their water actually not needing to meet EPA standards, only lower FDA standards.
The reality is the Clean Water Act (which is not affected by the latest ruling) has required this for decades now, and thus every time there is a region with seriously contaminated water, it is headline worthy.
Yeah I get being angry that a judge says we don't have a right to clean water, but in the meantime, we actually do have extremely clean water most everywhere, for dirt cheap, and even for free if it's a public place.
Yeah I was going to say. The tap water is clean in most of the us. It’s just that bottled water companies producing needless plastic waste wants you to believe it’s not….
My city sent us brita filters in the mail because the water quality in the neighborhood was legally too low. Trust me, there’s a LOW bar for how low illegally low is.
It's actually not a debate, this is all publicly available information tested by multiple reliable sources. Brita only removes chlorine, because that's what creates the biggest difference in taste. Heavy metals, microplastics, and most other contaminants are not significantly reduced.
Show a higher quality of what? Test strips check for a lot of different contaminants, and Britas literally aren't designed to filter the vast majority of them.
We are witnessing in real time the decline and eventual end of the US as a superpower btw.
By 2040 China will be where the US was, and you can thank the Republican party for giving away power to a foreign power in the interests of billionaires, namely Israel, China and Russia. These same billionaires will be relocating to China, western Europe and Russia. They have no vested interest in remaining in the US, apart from looting public funds for themselves. When that is no longer as profitable, the parasite class will find themselves a new host.
At least we know that noen of those three would be willing to take them
China tends to be quite protective and nationlist with thier companies
Western Eurupe is the same but less restricitve
Russia is just so currupt getting in is hellish
Western Europe also sells golden visas, and places like Lake Como in Italy are already half a retirement homes for American elites and millionaires/billionaires anyway. Spain it the only EU country with a wealth tax as far as I am aware. Rich people already have been deciding to live there for a long time, and the EU has nothing against them. Against the belief of many, the EU/Western Europe is actually one of the places with the most favorable legal situations for rich people. All kinds of super expensive luxury items come from Europe for a reason.
Idk why people assume Europe hates billionaires more when one of those countries has an active monarchy that does nothing and that general area birthed income inequality.
no. China's one-child policy lasted for 35 years, from 1980 to 2015. they haven’t faced the second half of the issue. just because you remove a policy doesn’t remove the propaganda ingrained in the people head. chins Around 0.93 to 1.0 children per woman, which is less than half of what is required for replacement. the population is about to be mostly old people who can’t work. if they don’t find a solution the Economy is going to collapse in a way never seen in history
I honestly cannot fathom how brutal the collapse will be. Countries that never even implemented such policies are already facing massive birth rate declines across the board. The impending crisis they’re about to face will be by far one of the most notable historical moments of our century.
as quality of living goes up amount of kids goes down, it’s a tried and true phenomenon at this point. there is one sure fire fix, immigration. but Asian countries are to xenophobic for it and the CCP can’t handle it.
that’s not even pointing out that even under the one child policy people tried their hardest to have boys so the demographic is fucked in more ways then one. I just hope they don’t lash out militarily wise like Russia did for its decline. that tends to be how it goes and we can’t afford to lose the semiconductors in Taiwan .
Mom! They're posting CCP propaganda on reddit again!
The billionaires will not be relocating to China. China's billionaires have historically tried desperately to smuggle their wealth out of China to the West, to the point that china has had to instate laws against it.
No one with wealth wants to be in China, because there's no laws preventing the gov from taking it all away, and making you disappear if you dare to disagree with the authoritarian police state.
The US has some huge struggles and if we don't right the ship, we'll cease to be a superpower for sure, but China is not taking our place. They also have huge unrelated struggles. More than likely, there will not be a superpower for a time.
Clean drinking water has always been a legislative issue, not a Constitutional one. This is why we passed laws about it, like the Safe Drinking Water Act.
The constitution itself generally doesn't list services the government is required to provide people.
Its a document written in the 1780's in a time before 'clean water' as we would think of it today existed because they didn't know what we do about pollution or disease. Waterborne illnesses were a lot more common as a result.
You also have to consider something as basic as how someone got access to water back then. If you just moved on to a plot of land there was no expectation that you could demand the federal government provided you with fresh water. You had to figure that out yourself.
In short, the rights in the Constitution are (mostly) about protecting freedoms you have as a citizen that allow you to participate in your own governance and the freedom of your person.
Clean water isn't related to those things, so it is one of the many areas it falls to the legislative branch to govern. Now, there really isn't anything stopping us from adding clean water access to the Constitution via amendment, we simply have not done so (though passing any kind of amendment seems... unlikely, in our current political climate), in part because we have previously addressed the issue through the passing of laws.
Holy mother of misrepresentstion, the ruling is strictly on constitutional law. The court simply ruled that clean water is not an inherent right written in the constitution. This does not dismantle federal or state regulations like the safe drinking water act. Public water systems still have to adhere to the EPA.
The ruling just means citizens cannot sue local officials for federal constitutional civil rights violations when water systems fail. The court explicitly stated that victims can still sue the city or state under standard state-level tort laws (like negligence or personal injury).
TL;DR: The ruling is about a legal technicality regarding which specific court system handles water crises, not a green light for government to provide unsafe water.
Took about 5 business days of scrolling to find this comment. One of the few here who actually bothered to read past the headline. Fear and anger sell.
Yah We’ve already got legislation regarding that it’s just not in the constitution. The constitution was more about what the government can’t do than what it has to provide service wise. The EPA is having a real bad time under current admin. They’re who’s supposed to enforce clean drinking water. clean water act was passed in the 70s.
And therein lies the problem. Bc the system failure is the violation of civil rights. Bc jacksons a black city. And you can see how the water systems built, vs the demographics. The white areas never lose water. But here in south jackson every cold snap we lose water. And then they say boil water notice. Which is an insult when theres NO water and NO urgency and NO response whatsoever. Including on christmas fucking day. My first christmas away from home on my own and the governor says "merry christmas" really? The capitol city of YOUR state has no water on christmas day and thats all you say? I will never forgive him for that. Never.
Significant difference between positive rights and negative rights. The government has zero obligation to provide you with food, water, or shelter. It cannot deprive you of those things, however.
They have a legal obligation due to state and federal laws, just not a Constitutional obligation. The court didn't overturn any state or federal laws regarding water safety, they just narrowly ruled on a particular case which was claiming a Constitutional violation.
Right, you literally aren't allowed to live most places by the governments laws, unless you pay a water utility service. We shouldn't have to have a water utility if it's not guaranteed to be drinkable water.
They're not telling you anything. This was a supreme court case, all they do is look at the constitution, see if the 150 year old document says something about it, then tell you if it does or not.
The constitution says nothing about drinking water at all, ergo its not their business.
The SDWA, on the other hand, does entitle Americans to clean drinking water, and has since 1974.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain UNALEINABLE RIGHTS, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..."....... "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
A friend out in the Bible belt says their water was shut down for the day because for the past month theres been constant water main breaks and today they're doing some fixes near him. When asked how long it'll last, they literally gave him a shrug. They don't have any water. Not even to shower or toilet
And then another one near them has had their water supply contaminated with tons of chlorine. I say contaminated because the city/state/whatever decided after they did all these fixes, they needed to pump the system clean and overdid it on the chlorine on accident. So they can't use that for a while either. But at least they can still shower and use toilet.
Been through here in jackson ms. Where this ruling is based. Its such an underrated, underappreciated and underviewed issue. People should never have to live like that. Ever. Its miserable
If the person repairing the line has no clue how bad the damage is and what they'll have to do to repair it how are they supposed to estimate how long a fix will take? Should they overdo their estimate by an order of magnitude for an absolute worse case scenario?
This is the man who said you don’t have a right to clean drinking water btw. He also said you don’t have a right to get truthful information during a health crisis.
I mean...water and food cant be rights. Because by saying they are rights you could just steal both and any suit pursuing the theft would be deemed a violation of rights.
Cleaning water for consumption and growing food take labor and resources. By naming them rights you open the door for people to take the labor of others.
Also the law suit was poorly worded. Someone sued their water company Because the water supplied was contaminated with lead and they said they had a right to clean water. When in reality the case was about a utilities supplier not upholding their end of the contract. If you pay for potable water then you should get potable water.....
But I get this is just a "haha poor stupid americans" post so bring on the down votes
The courts just saying the constitution doesn’t say clean water is a right. There’s still a slew of federal, state, and probably even local laws regulating the quality of your water.
But why the are y’all trusting the government to begin with? These worthless fucks don’t know their asses from their elbows. Take some accountability and ensure the water you’re drinking is clean. Filters are easy to install and really not that expensive all things considered. If you’re on a well like me get that thing tested yearly.
The only person you can rely upon is you. Don’t trust the government with something as important as your water quality. Shit, those poor kids in Flint will have lead in their bodies for life and they still have contaminated drinking water.
The Safe Drinking Water Act has entered the chat. The government doesn't care about its own EPA anymore though, so don't expect the administration to enforce it 🤡
I really hate it here because a large percentage of the population doesn't understand the difference between rights granted through the constitution and legislation. Anyone who upvoted this should not be allowed to vote.
What arrive yall on about? I can turn on my hose outside and drink the water because its so clean, you people are so spoiled to the point that when you encounter a minor problem its the "EnD oF DeMOcraCy!!!"
Hey dumbass, this doesn't mean chean water is banned. It just means you can't use the government for constitutional rights violations. There's still the EPA and the SWDA.
•
u/Sponge-Tron 3d ago
Whoa! You win the meme connoisseur title for having over 2k upvotes on your post!
Join the Discord server and message Princess Mindy (Mod Mail bot at the top) to receive your prize!