News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall... by tomohawk on Sunday October 06, 2013 @06:20AM (#6503672)
The US constitution says:

"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."

Re:Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall... by Maxious on Sunday October 06, 2013 @07:01AM (#6503719)
Wikipedia says:

> The Framers of the Constitution added this [no Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts] clause in response to the fear that states would continue a practice that had been widespread under the Articles of Confederation—that of granting "private relief." Legislatures would pass bills relieving particular persons (predictably, influential persons) of their obligation to pay their debts.

However it seems that in the Great Depression the Supreme Court held it to be okay for States to modify morgages under the "emergency exception doctrine" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Building_%26_Loan_Associat...

Re:Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall... by venomsnake on Sunday October 06, 2013 @06:52AM (#6503708)
And since when Richmond is a state? You can read the constitution by spirit or by the letter. You cannot have both.
Re:Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall... by tanzam75 on Sunday October 06, 2013 @11:12AM (#6504290)
> And since when Richmond is a state? You can read the constitution by spirit or by the letter. You cannot have both.

There is no local sovereignty in the United States, except for whatever a state chooses to delegate to its municipalities. (This is why you hear about states that take over failing cities' schools and finances. The city possesses no sovereignty.)

All of Richmond's powers derive from the State of California. If California is prohibited from doing something, then so is Richmond.

Re:Richmond’s rules: Why one California town is keeping Wall... by mikeash on Sunday October 06, 2013 @11:14AM (#6504301)
Don't local governments simply operate as agents of the state they're in? I could be wrong about this, but I thought that they were simply organizational conveniences with no true independence, as contrasted with the states and the feds, here the states are independent entities bound by certain rules.