this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2025
443 points (99.8% liked)

politics

26422 readers
2644 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

One federal employee said in a court filing that they "cannot in good conscience pretend to agree with President Trump’s policies."

Government employees asked a federal judge Wednesday to block the Trump administration from encouraging job applicants to demonstrate their loyalty to the president’s agenda.

In a lawsuit filed earlier this month, a group of federal labor unions argues that the White House’s “merit hiring plan” violates applicants’ First Amendment rights. The plan, put forth by the Office of Personnel Management, includes the following short essay question: 

“How would you help advance the President’s Executive Orders and policy priorities in this role? Identify one or two relevant Executive Orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you, and explain how you would help implement them if hired.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

https://legalclarity.org/can-you-sue-someone-from-another-country/

I can try to find something easier to read, but I didn't find any actual comics.

What are you having difficulty with in that link?

The most relevant bit is this:

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in International Shoe Co. v. Washington established the “minimum contacts” standard, guiding jurisdiction over foreign defendants.

Venue is influenced by factors such as the location of the parties, the place where the cause of action arose, and contractual agreements specifying a forum. Many international contracts include forum selection clauses, designating a specific jurisdiction for resolving disputes. These clauses are generally upheld by courts unless deemed unreasonable or unjust. The Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements provides a framework for recognizing and enforcing such clauses among member states.

You're on a US based social media website, it would not be difficult at all to have a lawsuit based on an exchange here heard in American courts.

You could ignore it, but then you'd almost certainly lose and have to fight collections.

But if I'm not doing a good enough job explaining, you're probably better off reading the full article

[–] 14th_cylon@lemmy.zip -3 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

You’re on a US based social media website

maybe they did not tell you that, but there is whole rest of the world behind us borders and not everything is "us based".

i am not us citizen on a website that is not hosted on us soil, doing something that is absolutely not illegal in my jurisdiction.

the only international cooperation you would get from justice system in my country would be showing you the middle finger, because "american snowflake did not like something they read on the internet" is not a crime here. go back to comics, or cry to mods, whichever you prefer.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

maybe they did not tell you that, but there is whole rest of the world behind us borders and not everything is “us based”.

Correct...

on a website that is not hosted on us soil

But you're on a lemmy.world community right now. And it's US based, and hosted on US soil, even tho your local instance may not be. But this community is, and this is where your comments are going and where they're being posted.

because “american snowflake did not like something they read on the internet” is not a crime here.

Doesn't matter if it's a crime there.

Or even if it's a crime in America.

Because a civili lawsuit isn't criminal...

That link didn't go into the difference of civil lawsuits and criminal prosecution in America, I could find one if you're not able on your own tho

go back to comics, or cry to mods, whichever you prefer.

I'm happy to try and help you understand, if you don't want help understanding, it's as easy as not replying again. Although I'm afraid continued incivil comments will likely keep resulting in your comments being deleted.

[–] 14th_cylon@lemmy.zip -1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

if you don’t want help understanding

you know what? go ahead and sue me, that will show me how right you are 😂

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

What would that prove that the SC ruling from that article hasn't already proven?

I've shown you proof that it can happen, along with a very detailed article going into the specifics of how it happens.

But you've went off on a tangent, I started with:

I’d probably lose, but I could still sue you over it.

And now you're arguing I couldn't win?

So you agree with me?

Admittedly it's hard to review the exchange after the majority of your comments have been removed.

[–] 14th_cylon@lemmy.zip -1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

What would that prove that the SC ruling from that article hasn’t already proven?

it could help you understand that us supreme court doesn't rule behind us borders. whether it actually would, i have no idea.

Admittedly it’s hard to review the exchange after the majority of your comments have been removed.

i understand you are trying unconventional attack vectors, but 2 out of 5 is not a majority, swetie. i see you are as good in math as you are in law. i am done with this discussion, bye.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago

it could help you understand that us supreme court doesn’t rule behind us borders

But...

I've linked you an article multiple times, even quoting the relevant sections on forum determination...

It would all happen in the US courts, again, like the link I provided explained in depth. It doesn't matter where you are, because your commenting on a community hosted in America.

Like you're right that US SC doesn't effect me suing you in your country's legal system, but literally no one is saying that. And I could have sworn we already got on the same page that this would happen in US courts?

i am done with this discussion, bye

And that's fine, all you have to do is stop replying.