| ▲ | IsTom 2 hours ago |
| On the other hand it means that states can just not do that and leave their citizens without clean drinking water. |
|
| ▲ | Smaug123 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Does it? I think that conclusion requires observing additionally that all federal law also fails to grant a right to safe drinking water, doesn’t it? |
| |
| ▲ | gavinsyancey an hour ago | parent [-] | | Many municipal water systems are wholely in one state. Does the Constitution grant Congress the right to control municipal water quality? Also it's kind of a moot point if federal law has not granted that right and does not seem likely to. |
|
|
| ▲ | u1hcw9nx an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Page 2 second paragraph."Rather, the remedy for Plaintiffs’ injuries lies in pursuing .." https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/24/24-60370-CV1.pd... |
| |
| ▲ | IsTom 31 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Yes > Rather, the remedy for Plaintiffs’ injuries lies in pursuing tort
claims, electing representatives who will better manage the public-water
system, and petitioning their representatives for other remedies. which is easier said than done. From outside of US this seems extremely ass backwards. |
|
