Care to expand on this?
Genuinely asking how Elon Musk unilaterally defying a unanimous court order is losing the “last scrap of pretense at democratic rule of law.” Seems like more of the same old oligarchy games like it always has been.
Tell me you have never been to Randall’s Island without saying you’ve never been to Randall’s island…
If anything the NIMBY crowd in NYC wants to keep this population here.
This is why turnout matters. If enough people vote against Trump the mandate will restore faith in the election results. Harris/Waltz need to win with a clear mandate. If not we will still be dealing with MAGA going forward.
Ah… gracias!
I’ve read this book…
So you are admitting there is a conflict between two laws that needs to be reconciled.
I propose creating a system… we could call it the “law conflict figuring out process or “LCFOP” for short. It would be a perfect place for people to voice thoughts that come after phrases like “To me a law means…”
It’s a crazy idea I know.
Edit: Also, this last comment you made at least digs into the substance of the issue in a way your initial reactionary comment does not. Thank you for adding to the conversation about the rights use of religion as a Trojan Horse for conservative legal positions.
Can’t argue with that understanding of the US legal system.
How is this church acting like it is above the law in this specific instance?
It used the legal system to get a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of town land use code. Seems like it followed the law and the process is playing out as intended.
And “this guy” thinks the Democrats should have got rid of the filibuster and pack the court. It’s just not something Biden can unilaterally accomplish.
Have followed him for a while. The video doesn’t discuss presidential authority to appoint justices to the Supreme Court, which is what is referenced in the post.
The video I linked at least discusses the authority to do a thing vs having immunity for doing a thing
