politics
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
view the rest of the comments
Off the top of my head,
Yes, this is an explicit step away from the authority of the federal government
It is FAR from California's first step (recognizing gay marriage; sanctuary state; legal weed; etc)
It is not a complete defiance of federal law per se. I suspect that the way California is going to try to negotiate will be by offering breaks on its own state and local taxes. California has a decent slew of state level taxes on many things. The state may be willing to reduce its own state taxes to offset the federal taxes as part of a separate deal with foreign nations.
Well they may not have to defy federal law. Could be a good faith deal. Where if California imports something the tariffs are still paid by the ordering companies, but California gives some kind of kick back or assurance that they will remain a better trading partner for a lesser retaliatory tariff. If say China says no tariffs on California, it would make many companies flock to doing all business that ships to China go through California. Making their industry possibly not hurt as bad, or even thrive.
If states start to see they are hurting much more than California, more states may flock to the ideals that are proping up said trade.
It's all very big IF's