A Trump-appointed judge also said Americans have no “constitutional right to truthful information” during a public health crisis.
On Friday, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit against the city of Jackson, Mississippi, which alleged the city knowingly let residents drink lead-contaminated water.
The lawsuit, first filed in 2022, says the contamination violated Jacksonians’ constitutional right to bodily integrity. Donald Trump-appointed judge Kurt Engelhardt disagreed. “The Constitution does not provide redress for every governmental wrongdoing,” Engelhardt said.
“Defendants’ actions allegedly deprived Plaintiffs of clean water and guileless information. These deprivations, while grievous, do not infringe upon any deeply rooted constitutional right.”
Says right here, “Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness.”
Without clean water there’s no life. With no life, there’s no liberty, and no pursuing happiness.
How do you “promote the general welfare” with filthy, poisonous water?
This is like the most fundamental thing, even Rome provided clean water. We’ve been surpassed by ancient Rome.
Yes, but- Someone forgot to transfer that line to the constitution. We’re all going to die or become bonded corporate slaves because of an administrative oversight.
Edit: on second thought, maybe the first one was a well-written a call to arms and they knew exactly what they were doing when they wrote the actual charter.
In some parts of the world, people are thinking about UBI.
In other parts of the world, having safe drinking water is put into question.
Yeah lets wrap this US gov up at this point. No right to clean water and the truth lol.
You will drink sludge and accept our lies like the good little American sheep you are.
Oh, it was a conservative deciding this. This tracks.
When some rights you should have aren’t given to you, you need to do something to make sure you take them.
Do Americans have any rights anymore?
That is some 3rd World shit right there. Hire a plumber to reroute that asswipe’s water supply.
What about the water youre paying for that had the implied value of being safe. Being defrauded by a group selling the water is a crime and every customer should have access to what they are paying for.
Mississippi law provides civil immunity to cities for certain liability, including negligence. So I assume they brought the constitutional claim because they couldn’t bring a negligence claim. But if you think that is bad, consider how much more immunity law enforcement has.
Edit: also, fraud is usually a legal term in most states, relating to altering business documents like contracts, receipts, and ledgers with intent to profit.
US citizens are unwittingly time travelling back to a palaeolithic style of life. You want the government to provide clean water? “F**k you!” replies Uncle Sam
Sooooo… Abortion is cool, right? Either they’re humans and not entitled to the necessities to live, or they’re not humans and can have separate constitutional rights.
Or maybe there’s a third option here? Is there something special about people from Jackson, Mississippi that would preclude them from enjoying constitutional/human rights?
Foreshadowing
It falls under the life part of consti rights, he’s obtuse.
Well, he’s sorta right. It’s not explicitly in the text (though, one could argue it would maybe come from the 9th Amendment). The basis for the Clean Water Act and the EPA would arise out of Congress’s power to promote a general welfare combined with regulating interstate commerce.
If clear drinking water was a human right in the US, then it would be covered by the Constitution as well.
If something was clearly, precisely defined in the constitution it would still be worthless if some group of rich cunts came to a consensus that it would be better for them if the courts were to interpret it differently.
The US legal system has a terminal case of corruption.
Pursuit of happiness seemsbto include proper hydration for most.
This chud only thinks rights exist if they’re written on piece paper by someone 250 years ago. 🫵😂
What a fucking loser.
If water was a right, anyone could have as much of it as they want to use for pretty much any reason.
That’s not how that works. Following your logic, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness would mean anyone could do anything they want if it makes them happy, which is obviously not true.
A person’s life and liberty and pursuit of happiness aren’t shared resources existing in finite amounts. Water is. I’m not making a statement about what policy should be implemented, just what words should be used. Rights are ephemeral and unalienable, and water is very much neither of those.
deleted by creator
