xyzzy

joined 2 weeks ago
[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 33 points 4 days ago

Besides the fact that this guy is a fascist, I'm tired of judicial nominees refusing to answer any questions whatsoever by saying how inappropriate it would be to answer. It's gotten to the point where every nominee responds to every question like this:

Multiple Democratic senators pressed Bove in their questionnaire to clarify if Bove believes the Constitution permits Mr. Trump to run for a third term, despite the restrictions of the 22nd Amendment, which states that "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice."

"As a nominee to the Third Circuit, it would not be appropriate for me to address how this Amendment would apply in an abstract hypothetical scenario," Bove responded on multiple occasions. "To the extent this question seeks to elicit an answer that could be taken as opining on the broader political or policy debate regarding term limits, or on statements by any political figure, my response, consistent with the positions of prior judicial nominees, is that it would be improper to offer any such comment as a judicial nominee."

Of course, apparently it doesn't actually matter if they lie directly, since multiple Supreme Court nominees have without consequence.

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 3 points 5 days ago

Oh, I thought it might be a screening of one of his good films. I'll pass

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 17 points 5 days ago

He's already made statements well before this that he basically hates his job. This allows him to go out self-righteously

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 21 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Jump Bug (late 1981) is the earliest. It has an entirely underwater level, and the car moves more slowly in it. It was also one of the earliest platformers, beaten only by Donkey Kong (mid 1981) and a couple others.

Super Mario Bros. (1985) introduced a significantly different mechanic for its water levels from the rest of the game, specifically swimming, and it was about a bajillion times more popular than Jump Bug. But it wasn't the first.

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 1 points 6 days ago

Maybe it can be a Murder on the Orient Express situation

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 18 points 6 days ago

I've worked in startups most of my career and co-founded two companies. This is dumb. Most startups fail and it ain't because people aren't working hard enough.

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 17 points 1 week ago

I love how outspoken and defiant Brown is

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the sole member of the court to record a dissent. She said President Donald Trump is unleashing a “wrecking ball” on the federal government, and she slammed the court’s majority for its “demonstrated enthusiasm for greenlighting this President’s legally dubious actions in an emergency posture.”

Jackson, a Biden appointee, said her colleagues were inappropriately reinterpreting Illston’s findings, noting that appeals courts are supposed to adhere to a lower court’s conclusions about disputed facts. Lower courts have better command of the facts at this early stage in the litigation, she wrote in a 15-page dissent.

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 9 points 1 week ago

Now churches will move the line and announce their endorsements publicly ("That announcement was intended for our congregations only!") and dare the IRS to do something about it.

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 27 points 1 week ago

Yeah, of course he's guilty. I'm saying the accusation should be enough and they shouldn't have to wait for him to be convicted. But either way they should establish a policy around it.

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 74 points 1 week ago (4 children)

The Nobel committee should maybe not accept nominations from an accused ICC war criminal

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

It's OK, they won't

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Birthright citizenship was not struck down. Universal injunctions were struck down, which means the Constitution will be applied in any cases where a state has a law on the books or a class action suit has been brought and a statewide injunction has been declared. These suits will wind their way through the courts and may possibly be heard by the Supreme Court.

I'd like to predict the USSC would decline to hear the case because there would be no discrepancies in prior rulings and the legal question would be so obvious, but I've given up trying to predict this court. In any event, I do think it's unlikely they would rule against birthright citizenship, since it would be plainly unconstitutional and there's no real wiggle room to reinterpret it differently.

view more: ‹ prev next ›