There’s a story in the NY Times this morning about Gov. Jindal of Louisiana threatening that if the Feds don’t make more progress protecting his State from the leaking oil in the Gulf, Louisiana will take matters into its own hands. (Exactly what that could mean from a State as poor as Louisiana is a little fuzzy.)
How different is this from Arizona’s actions re immigration? Both result from inadequate Federal response to national problems. Both are usurpations of Federal authority, where law clearly assigns that authority to the Federal government?
Thoughts?
You can have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, or democracy. But you cannot have both.
Whatever Works 
Pingback: Wells and borders – both leaking | rssblogstory.com
Law assigns the responsibility and commensurate authority for such matters to the federal government, but the federal government has willfully refused to fulfill their responsibilities in these same matters. That has forced the states to supersede , such as they can, the failed federal government’s unused or misused authority in these matters.
LikeLike
Hey jonolan, nice to see you.
Looks like we’ve found something to agree on.
I don’t know what the answer is – Arizona’s law will neither solve their (our) problem nor stand up in court. And Bobby Jindal’s earth berms won’t solve Lousiana’s (our) problem either. I think NOAA (my source for all things oil) is saying the berms could only delay the onshore damage – although there may be some value in that alone.
But who knows – that’s the worst of it.
LikeLike
Bobby Jindal VS BP?
Jindal ain’t got a chance.
LikeLike
Or was it Jindal VS the Democratic Admin?
Jindal has even less of a chance.
We saw how effective he is when he delivered his lame response speech.
LikeLike
This one flies in the face of all things conservative. They’re begging for a government take over. Imagine!!! Big brother moving in on a private company! Mon dieu!!!!
LikeLike