←back to thread

Chat Control: Incompatible with Fundamental Rights (2022)

(freiheitsrechte.org)
833 points Bluestein | 1 comments | 18 Jun 24 09:34 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
mro_name ◴[18 Jun 24 10:16 UTC] No.40715944[source]▶
I wonder how it can be legal to repeatedly undermine constitution and push or vote for later high-court-nullified laws and be allowed to repeat as if nothing was wrong with that. Like drunk driving forever. We ban counter-constitutional activities outside parliament and authorities. Why not inside?

I am much for 3-strikes here.

replies(6): >>40716013 #>>40716069 #>>40716073 #>>40716129 #>>40716284 #>>40717138 #
JumpCrisscross ◴[18 Jun 24 10:34 UTC] No.40716073[source]▶
> to repeatedly undermine constitution

The EU doesn’t have a constitution [1], simply enabling treaties [2].

The solution would be in ratifying a constitution.

> am much for 3-strikes here

Careful. A party in power will seek to nullify issues by putting forward and then defeating sham bills.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Consti...

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaties_of_the_European_Uni...

replies(4): >>40716090 #>>40716233 #>>40716244 #>>40716310 #
1. mro_name ◴[18 Jun 24 10:59 UTC] No.40716244[source]▶
I mean e.g. the safe harbour scandal that EUGH nullified after a 10-year legal struggle. Was violating EU core values. That's as close to unconsitutional as one may get not having one. Then came privacy shield, another 10-year legal fight and groundhog day. You get the idea.