• SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      That’s just because the R’s expressly don’t care about constitutionality. If the UK had a written constitution, both parties are still at a level of integrity where they’d want to (at least appear to) be keeping it, so a judicial challenge to these terrorist acts might have actually struck them down.

      • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        19 hours ago

        The Democrats don’t care about the Constitution either. Their platform certainly isn’t filled with promises to say, repeal the post 9/11 mass surveillance laws. They have zero interest in curtailing the powers of an out-of-control presidency; they just want those powers for themselves.

        • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          That’s because they lose their bargaining chips for elections, also being wealthy , that why they don’t reverse the tax cuts with the next preisdent

        • SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          Hmm true, there is the ECHR. But it is implemented into british law in such a way that there’s nothing stopping laws being passed which are incompatible with it. Whereas with the US and other constitutions you have judicial review.

          • That’s not specific to having a constitution. Judges in the Netherlands for example also cannot do a judicial review to determine the constitutionality of any passed laws. And that’s with a written constitution. There’s also no supreme court. The closest thing is the Raad van State (the “state council”), which evaluates all laws on proportionality, constitutionality, and executability, and then advises the government what to do with a law. It’s convention that that advice is followed, but it’s not required.