that's exactly the plan. Try many times, and as long as it passes once, it can't be removed forever because no politicians will ever touch it. That's why the current system of law-making is completely gamed against citizens.
It works in our countries too. Try to pass a terrible bill. Get rejected. Try again. Rejected. Again. Again. Again. They only have to get it through once, since laws are very rarely removed, only added.
People can try to fight these laws, try to get their congress critter to not vote for them, try to organize protests and raise media attention but none of those things will work.
It might work once, and put off such laws until the next month or the next election, but those with the vested interest have the time, money, influence, and power to see these laws passed eventually.
The government is no longer concerned nor responsive to the common good.
The only real way to fight these laws are to ignore them and to repeatedly break then. To resist arrest and to challenge the status quo with trying to overplay their hand and oppresse people like the true tyrants they are.
Politicians that create laws that are later deemed unconstitutional need to be removed from office. Without any repercussions they'll just keep trying until they eventually slip one through.
Every law like this drags the Overton window further to the right by normalising the exclusionary discourse. The goal is not to get them passed at first try, but, if nothing is done, they will get passed at some point.
But if they just rephrase it, or take key elements from it, rewrite it and put it in another bill... you're still dealing with the same thing.
It's one major flaw in the current legal / government system, I think, in that there's no codified and simplified way to process new rules and laws; for example, a gun ban may never pass, but a number of smaller changes that make it more difficult for people to get guns may over time pass. May have the same effect in the long run, but it' s not a gun ban.
There is no viable alternative and there won't be without changing the law. And the law won't be changed due to lobbying (any success would be temporary)
In principle it should be easy, in practice (in the US at least) it's nearly impossible. The US senate is currently in nearly total gridlock. Passing new laws is crazy hard.
As a wise man pointed out on HN the last time around, we haven't won when this law fails to pass. We've only won a law explicitly stating the opposite passes.
Your better answer isn't possible. Not only is passing laws basically impossible at this point, but giving bureaucratic institutions authority to solve unforeseen problems is a good thing. It just isn't possible for lawmakers to conceive of every loophole and edge case. It's too slow to pass a new law every time one comes up, if it's even possible at all.
There's no downside to passing unconstitutional bills. They just need to become law and remain in effect long enough to be useful in electoral campaigns. When the courts strike the law down, they'll be painted as activist justices and yadda yadda we've seen all this before.
reply