No constitutional right to clean water, federal court finds
1–10 of 178 posts
Re: No constitutional right to clean water, federal court finds
#2Government officials allowing this to happen should be sentenced to acute lead poisoning.
Re: No constitutional right to clean water, federal court finds
#3> alleged that the city knowingly allowed residents to drink unsafe water.
Surely knowingly letting people drink lead contaminated water breaks other laws rather than their constitutional rights?
Re: No constitutional right to clean water, federal court finds
#4This seems to fall under the whole “promote the general welfare” part of the Preamble of the Constitution, though perhaps the court is unaware of it.
Re: No constitutional right to clean water, federal court finds
#5> alleged that the city knowingly allowed residents to drink unsafe water. Surely knowingly letting people drink lead contaminated water breaks other laws rather than their constitutional rights?
Turns out, if the government does it, no.
Re: No constitutional right to clean water, federal court finds
#6> Rather, he said residents should take other paths to redress, including electing better representatives and petitioning the government for remedies.
Is suing the government not essentially a petition for remedies? How else do you get the gov to listen?
Re: No constitutional right to clean water, federal court finds
#7> alleged that the city knowingly allowed residents to drink unsafe water. Surely knowingly letting people drink lead contaminated water breaks other laws rather than their constitutional rights?
Dependence on "interpretation of the day" of the US Constitution seems to have overtaken regular maintenance of the law in a lot of high profile issues for the last many decades.
Re: No constitutional right to clean water, federal court finds
#8People don't read enough court decisions. Did you know you don't have a constitutional right to be protected by the police either
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzale...
> the Court ruled, 7–2, that a town and its police department could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for refusing to enforce a restraining order, even though the refusal led to the murders of a woman's three children by her estranged husband
Re: No constitutional right to clean water, federal court finds
#9> Rather, he said residents should take other paths to redress, including electing better representatives and petitioning the government for remedies. Is suing the government not essentially a petition for remedies? How else do you get the gov to listen?
>Is suing the government not essentially a petition for remedies? How else do you get the gov to listen?
The polite answer to that is JFK's line, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
Re: No constitutional right to clean water, federal court finds
#10This seems to fall under the whole “promote the general welfare” part of the Preamble of the Constitution, though perhaps the court is unaware of it.
That sentence just says why we're making a national government (i.e. giving up some of our rights). It does not create some unlimited requirement for governments (especially state) to do whatever they can to promote general welfare, whatever that means. It doesn't even grant unlimited authority to do so. Or really say anything at all except state a very general purpose for why a national government is a sensible thing to have.
> We the People... in order to... [do establish] this Constitution