[timeflex]

Generally federal law will preempt state law. See the Court's decisions regarding California's attempt to ban arbitration agreements in employment contracts.

Now, that doesn't mean the Supreme Court won't come up with their own hot take, but at some point appeals and district courts are just going to say no when they send a case back.

What is the Supreme Court going to do? Federal judges can only be removed by impeachment of the House and conviction of the Senate. The Supreme Court has no power to enforce its decisions.

[HaZeust]

As Jackson quipped; "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it." We'll see where this goes, and if it's honored.

[Aloisius]

The quote is likely apocryphal.

There was nothing to enforce as the court didn't impose any obligations on Jackson.

[HaZeust]

Jackson was VERY vocal about his disapproval for the Marshall Supreme Court.

The obligations imposed by the ruling within Worcester v. Georgia was that states (specifically Georgia) could not enact and enforce regulations on Reservations and Native American land because of pre-existing treaties. It was never claimed that the quote is about what decisions were made with regards to Jackson; it was about what decisions were made for Georgia, and that Jackson had no intent to enforce them.

Jackson was very much complacent to Georgia's continued intent to regulate, and later remove, Native Americans from their designated land.

[banish-m4]

The odds of the conservative activism SCOTUS siding with employees and COTUS (bought off by corporate lobbyists) passing a worker-friendly prohibition on noncompetes are both zero. OTOH, it's not outside the realm of possibility that COTUS might pass a federal law superseding laws in California, Colorado, Illinois, Oregon, Nevada, Washington state, and Washington DC to roll back states rights favoring workers. Similar state bills in NY and NJ died in committee in 2022.

[oceanplexian]

There is widespread bipartisan support for noncompetes. NY, a bastion of liberal politics still overwhelmingly refuses to make noncompetes illegal.

[toomuchtodo]

> There is widespread bipartisan support for noncompetes. NY, a bastion of liberal politics still overwhelmingly refuses to make noncompetes illegal.

NY Governor Hochul vetoed it because she is a hack politician and yielded to Wall Street pressure. Politicians with a spine (or constitution, if you prefer) are in short supply.

https://apnews.com/article/noncompete-agreement-bill-veto-ne...

> But in recent months, the legislation had come under fierce attack by Wall Street and top business groups in New York. They argued the agreements are necessary to protect investment strategies and keep highly-paid workers from leaving their companies with prized inside information and working for an industry rival.

[banish-m4]

That's the rule rather than the exception in the US as politicians go. Campaign finance reform failed because most (not all) politicians are indeed crooks who accept gold bars from foreign governments, embezzle from their campaign to buy luxury goods, or pay hush money to porn stars.

Let me refer you to George Carlin's approach: https://youtu.be/xIraCchPDhk

[banish-m4]

> There is widespread bipartisan support

At which level(s), or do you mean voters? Voter sentiment has essentially no bearing on public policy, and it was even proven with data in a Princeton study confirming what we already knew. [0]

If I might quote Gore Vidal: There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt — until recently … and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties.

Partisanship tribalism is a divide-and-conquer gambit that has been largely successful in keeping Americans fighting each other counterproductively and voting against their own interests.

0. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli...