Energy Firms in Secretive Alliance with Attorneys General
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
I'm not familiar with how the constitutional federalism rules play out in regards to the behavior of public officials in the states. It seems to me that it would be tremendously difficult for someone in Oklahoma who opposed this policy to sue the attorney-General over it, for example. The collective suits of the Federal government by multiple states that have proliferated in recent years are also hard to assess legally. Can any of our resident lawyers offer an opinion on this, even a shallow one?
That's an interesting question. The constitution says, "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government" (not Republican party -- there are no parties in the US constitution). I think most people have taken that to mean no monarchies.
But consent of the governed also rules out corporatist states. However since state attorneys general are either elected directly or appointed by elected officials it may be considered (by transitivity at the very least) that these As-G in fact have the consent of the people to act against their interests.
#5 "Confessions of a mortician"
#9 "The Divine Comedy"
#10 "The Return of Africa’s Strongmen"
#12 "America’s Toughest, Ugliest Warplane Is Going Back into Battle"
#18 "Khoisan have been the largest population throughout most of modern-human history"