My gas tank bill is starting to look like a grocery bill and my grocery bill is starting to look like a Costco bill and my Costco bill is starting to look like a mortgage payment and I don’t know how people are affording to live right now.
Answer: They can’t. Democrats are hoping you’ll take the hint and just die.
The Washington Examiner: "Thomas was the lone dissenter from an 8-1 majority opinion in United States v. Rahimi, which upheld a federal gun ban for people under domestic violence restraining orders — a decision that pleased the Biden administration and gun control groups."
Thomas is just being consistent. Before Roe was overturned, a constitutional right to an abortion could not be denied to women who were "under domestic violence restraining orders". I don't know if any state ever tried to pass such a law, but I'm 100% certain that if such a law ever were to come up (before Roe was overturned) the Supremes would have struck it down unanimously.
A "domestic violence restraining order", or basically a phone call to the police, should be insufficient to deny citizens their constitutional rights.
Instapundit: WAR IS COMING: "Senate Democrats have added language to the annual defense authorization bill to require women to register for the draft."
This is why he's hated by the left. Their version of the Constitution is that it allows whatever they want and prohibits whatever they don't. The actual written words don't really matter all that much unless they can be used to confirm their preferences.
Bees are attending to Smooth Sumac blossoms. I have about 200 feet of Smooth Sumac with maybe 100 bees to a tree, so maybe a total of a couple thousand bees at work.
Media framing of the Rahimi dissent as arguing for rights for domestic abusers is typically biased. Thomas’s point, I believe, is that when one has not been convicted of anything, one shouldn’t forfeit constitutional rights. Domestic violence TROs are often routinely granted ex parte, and frequently sought out of spite. (And it’s difficult to enforce an order to surrender firearms to except by authorizing a search without probable cause. (Which is a problem with “Red Flag” laws, too.))
CNN has released the revised rules for the upcoming debate.
> Biden will be permitted two IV's during the 90 minute debate.
> A reclining chair will be provided for Biden while Trump is answering loaded questions.
> Google translate will be utilized during Biden's answers when they are unintelligible. The translations will be flashed across television screen for viewers.
> Politifact will make corrections to Trump's lies. A red light will appear to warn viewers of Trump's misstatements.
> No videos will be shown of Biden entering the debate stage or exiting.
> Jim Acosta has been added as a debate moderator for balance.
When I was in law school, I did some volunteering at the courthouse helping women get restraining orders against abusive partners (it was a tightrope walk and most of the women who came in needed help understanding the implications of their words so they could choose them carefully—don’t allege enough and you might not get the order, allege too much and they might take your children away).
It was a one-sided process. The other person wasn’t there and there were no evidentiary requirements. The decision was made entirely on the complainant’s testimony (because the only implication to the other party was that they had to stay away from this person—no other right was being restricted).
Attaching the loss of a fundamental constitutional right completely changes what is happening and I’m honestly shocked that the SC was so short-sighted they failed to recognize that the low and one-sided standards used in these hearings cannot be deemed sufficient.
While watching my three and five year old granddaughters romp this past weekend, it occurred to me that White Privilege largely accrues from having a mother and father present, who are married.
The rule of Lemnity said... Instapundit: WAR IS COMING: "Senate Democrats have added language to the annual defense authorization bill to require women to register for the draft."
require women to register for the draft =============== who will have legal standing to find out 'what is woman' or qualify exempt otherwise or will this go the way of never defining / finding out 'what is income'
Support the Althouse blog by doing your Amazon shopping going in through the Althouse Amazon link.
Amazon
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Support this blog with PayPal
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
18 comments:
Seen on Instapundit:
My gas tank bill is starting to look like a grocery bill and my grocery bill is starting to look like a Costco bill and my Costco bill is starting to look like a mortgage payment and I don’t know how people are affording to live right now.
Answer: They can’t. Democrats are hoping you’ll take the hint and just die.
The Washington Examiner: "Thomas was the lone dissenter from an 8-1 majority opinion in United States v. Rahimi, which upheld a federal gun ban for people under domestic violence restraining orders — a decision that pleased the Biden administration and gun control groups."
Thomas is just being consistent. Before Roe was overturned, a constitutional right to an abortion could not be denied to women who were "under domestic violence restraining orders". I don't know if any state ever tried to pass such a law, but I'm 100% certain that if such a law ever were to come up (before Roe was overturned) the Supremes would have struck it down unanimously.
A "domestic violence restraining order", or basically a phone call to the police, should be insufficient to deny citizens their constitutional rights.
Instapundit: WAR IS COMING: "Senate Democrats have added language to the annual defense authorization bill to require women to register for the draft."
God help us if Biden steals it again.
"Thomas is just being consistent."
This is why he's hated by the left. Their version of the Constitution is that it allows whatever they want and prohibits whatever they don't. The actual written words don't really matter all that much unless they can be used to confirm their preferences.
Bees are attending to Smooth Sumac blossoms. I have about 200 feet of Smooth Sumac with maybe 100 bees to a tree, so maybe a total of a couple thousand bees at work.
Smooth Sumac
Watch the Jiminy Glick interview of Bill Maher that was on tonight's Real Time episode. He really takes the piss out of him.
Simon Ateba
@simonateba
Judge Judy goes off on DA Alvin Bragg for going after Trump for a non-crime while allowing criminals to run free in New York City. WATCH
https://twitter.com/i/status/1804199671071416481
Media framing of the Rahimi dissent as arguing for rights for domestic abusers is typically biased. Thomas’s point, I believe, is that when one has not been convicted of anything, one shouldn’t forfeit constitutional rights. Domestic violence TROs are often routinely granted ex parte, and frequently sought out of spite. (And it’s difficult to enforce an order to surrender firearms to except by authorizing a search without probable cause. (Which is a problem with “Red Flag” laws, too.))
Pink says I can go for miles if you know what I mean- I don’t know what she means…
I mean if it’s a sexual reference the units are wrong aren’t they? It’s the Han Solo twelve parsecs problem…
CNN has released the revised rules for the upcoming debate.
> Biden will be permitted two IV's during the 90 minute debate.
> A reclining chair will be provided for Biden while Trump is answering loaded questions.
> Google translate will be utilized during Biden's answers when they are unintelligible. The translations will be flashed across television screen for viewers.
> Politifact will make corrections to Trump's lies. A red light will appear to warn viewers of Trump's misstatements.
> No videos will be shown of Biden entering the debate stage or exiting.
> Jim Acosta has been added as a debate moderator for balance.
When I was in law school, I did some volunteering at the courthouse helping women get restraining orders against abusive partners (it was a tightrope walk and most of the women who came in needed help understanding the implications of their words so they could choose them carefully—don’t allege enough and you might not get the order, allege too much and they might take your children away).
It was a one-sided process. The other person wasn’t there and there were no evidentiary requirements. The decision was made entirely on the complainant’s testimony (because the only implication to the other party was that they had to stay away from this person—no other right was being restricted).
Attaching the loss of a fundamental constitutional right completely changes what is happening and I’m honestly shocked that the SC was so short-sighted they failed to recognize that the low and one-sided standards used in these hearings cannot be deemed sufficient.
I hope I’m missing something important.
While watching my three and five year old granddaughters romp this past weekend, it occurred to me that White Privilege largely accrues from having a mother and father present, who are married.
That isn't Madison, is it?
So Strange...
https://www.theblaze.com/news/chinese-entities-own-farmland-next-to-19-us-military-bases-across-the-country-report
The rule of Lemnity said...
Instapundit: WAR IS COMING: "Senate Democrats have added language to the annual defense authorization bill to require women to register for the draft."
But what about the other 54 odd genders?
require women to register for the draft
===============
who will have legal standing to find out 'what is woman' or qualify exempt otherwise
or will this go the way of never defining / finding out 'what is income'
nice vague legal system you have there
Post a Comment