Re:US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is ...
by dylan604 on Monday December 22, 2025 @03:40PM
(#46358774)
> Seems like "national security" has become a phrase that can be used to circumvent many laws
By has become, you mean always has been, right?
Re:US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is ...
by bakies on Monday December 22, 2025 @03:45PM
(#46358833)
I guess I think it used to be more believable that it was used for security, but maybe I wouldn't if I knew better history.
Re:US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is ...
by zmgsabst on Monday December 22, 2025 @07:08PM
(#46360831)
I’m inclined to believe always — as the case establishing “state secrets” for national security was actually about covering up negligence.
https://www.cato.org/commentary/48-crash-us-hid-behind-natio...
Re:US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is ...
by BLKNSLVR on Monday December 22, 2025 @04:13PM
(#46359163)
Since 2001 at least.
Re:US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is ...
by _aavaa_ on Monday December 22, 2025 @04:16PM
(#46359198)
Since WWII and the bomb. See Bomb Power by Garry Wills
Re:US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is ...
by shimman on Monday December 22, 2025 @11:20PM
(#46362387)
Behind the Bastards had a great series about this too (it was either that book, or another).
Re:US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is ...
by sowbug on Monday December 22, 2025 @07:19PM
(#46360903)
Don't forget "war on" something that isn't a nation state.
Re:US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is ...
by abirch on Monday December 22, 2025 @07:39PM
(#46361056)
I think the Washington Generals have a better record than the USA on “wars on” non nation states
Re:US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is ...
by GolfPopper on Monday December 22, 2025 @07:19PM
(#46360912)
>It seems like if these ever get challenged to the Supreme Court the current judges will rule with something like it being at the president's discretion.
Given that this is the same Supreme Court that ruled Biden (or Trump) could have them all shot[1], it seems near-certain that you're correct.
1. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf (JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR dissent, pages 29-30)
So obviously the government can spend some of that $1T military budget on fixing their coastal radar.
I thought Massachusetts just won in court to get their money or construction resumed, wonder if this means they have to go back to court.