A lot of stuff does have interstate implications. Especially now that most corporations operate in an interstate fashion.
That said, I agree that it's overused. I personally think that the 9th amendment should be used in a lot of cases, like civil rights, instead of the interstate commerce law.
The supreme court, however, has basically decided that the 9th amendment doesn't really exist.
You could just as easily stuff most of those things under the "general welfare" clause if you do the same rigamarole of years and years of precedent hand-waving. We live in a post constitutional state. The constitution is just something worked to backwards so the guys who function as our priests/gods point to the document because that's the only way to feign some sort of legitimacy to our government.
Ultimately none of us signed the constitution and all of those people that did are dead. It is a religious artifact used by the whig
-god people to argue they are right. Not something followed with faith to the historical context nor literal contract.
(edit: to below trying to compare bad-faith ICC to good-faith general welfare, you must apply similar levels of creativity and bad faith. Ban things through high or impossible to pay taxation. "Tax" behavior to force people to do something in a certain way, make very heavy penalties for not paying the tax, and also make it extremely difficult to buy the tax stamps (this is how they did drug control until they decided to use the new fraud of "interstate" commerce).
For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars … But what would have been thought of that assembly, if, attaching themselves to these general expressions, and disregarding the specifications which ascertain and limit their import, they had exercised an unlimited power of providing for the common defense and general welfare? I appeal to the objectors themselves, whether they would in that case have employed the same reasoning in justification of Congress as they now make use of against the convention. How difficult it is for error to escape its own condemnation!
I agree, from the other side of the aisle. The Constitution is merely a well-guarded piece of toilet paper now. Culture matters way more than legal documents in preserving a nation, and our culture has waned too significantly. I believe we've entered the "Byzantine" phase of America.
States don't have "rights", people do. I don't support any state's power to take away any human's rights. And bootlickers who do shouldn't have the chance to act out their fascistic fantasies
It's reasonable to believe that a blanket ban on data centers constitutes a regulatory taking, and therefore run afoul of people's property rights. A data center doesn't pose some unreasonable risk to the public interest to justify this degree of action.
It’s a ban on any DC over 20 megawatts, regardless of site or situation - that’s a blanket ban because there’s no exceptions or justifications for the ban to apply to every large DC, regardless of location.
From what I can tell, case law on takings via this kind of regulation is “case by case”, without a clear test for when it crosses over the line into an unreasonable imposition on property rights.
It's a pause. And not a particularly long one either.
Maine is saying "we don't have the legal infrastructure to make sure we can build these out in a way that protects the environment and our residents so let's put a pause on building while we build up that framework"
Maine is saying "hey give us until 2027 to research this and provide a good regulatory framework for massive data centers that don't impede on human rights to clean water and air". The moratorium expires after 2027.
What human right is being violated here?
Would you also say the requirement to get a driver's license is a violation of a human right?
Some people are addicted to the taste of boots. In most of the US, small cities are being bullied around by huge tech firms that have taken over their political infrastructure and bought out their politicians. The people of Maine are sticking up to bid-rigging, bribery, and political collusion. More power to them
They're not even the first. Kentucky is facing fallout from uncovered collusion between local officials and developers (Western Hospitality Partners) to advance a data center project and they've also had to place a moratorium.
> In most of the US, small cities are being bullied around by huge tech firms that have taken over their political infrastructure and bought out their politicians.
That’s like saying “Mainers should be allowed to ban speech they don’t like, and private sex acts they find offensive”. Your view of what constitutes freedom is nonsensical.
Your examples are both unconstitutional (see Lawrence v. Texas for the second), so no, there are limits. Also the majority of sane individuals would not bother to vote on that kind of stuff to meet a qualified majority, not in a democracy and not without a massive brainwashing campaign (which should be banned btw).
Also, as others have pointed out, this is not a ban but a moratorium. AI bros just have to wait until the hype cools down to build data centers in Maine, or build them elsewhere.
Both sides are government bullying with slightly different paths to abstract/obfuscate it away. Sure, hairs can be split over the exact nature and amount if desired.
I agree, it’s shocking that the only productive sector of society has managed to remain unmolested for this long. I’m sure it won’t last, and we’ll soon regulate it into nonexistence and turn ourselves into Western Europe.
And what does "productive" mean to you, exactly? To most, causing eating disorders in teenage girls (Instagram), being at the root of undermining various democracies (Facebook) and having credible evidence of aiding addiction for profit (this case) against you would be a tough set of qualifiers, I'd imagine.
reply