News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
For a recent example, they said the president cannot deport people under the Alien Enemies Act and that the government needs to give people a reasonable timeline to get a lawyer and mount a legal defense.
The federal government lost that one (for now at least.. they sent the question of Alien Enemies Act back to lower courts.. but not habeus corpus)
What happens if in a couple of months, the federal government just sends some people to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act- directly ignoring the SC?
This would fit in with the administration's strategy. Do legally dubious things to cause chaos. Ie sending troops into LA totally unnecessarily. Why? Cause protests, legal doubts about whether or not federal government has a right to use military against domestic citizens.
Or the military parade.. or the tariffs.. defunding NOAA hoping for a destructive hurricane, etc. It's chaos for the sake of chaos. Same reason they deported the Venezuelans in the first place without habeas corpus.
It's a concerted and consistent effort to weaken the public institutions until they feel like enough is enough and deal the final blow. The moment where they finally roll the die and cross the Rubicon.
The SC is the only one that has the potential to stand up to the administration. I firmly believe there will be a showdown.
Note- The "official acts" thing has more nuance although that can of worms is not something I have time for. But when that ruling happened, I read the opinions the justices.
Not everything counts as an official act. For example Reagan's Iran Contra business would not have fallen under the definition.
You or I may not agree with the SC on every ruling. But the individuals on there, for the most part, are scholars of the constitution and hold a deep respect for it. It's why even people like Kavanaugh who was appointed by Trump will sometimes rule against his interests.
We may disagree on some interpretations but these people genuinely believe in the rule of law. This will inevitably clash with the administration.
And then said,"But we can't make him stop ignoring us"
Nothing at all.
I think it's more about building up the dictatorship, so nothing stands in his way.
This is a fucking laughable joke. You're kidding, right?
lol, ok. Which law? Bible law? Trump law?
Your response provides very little substance. If I were you I'd ask myself why am I spending my valuable time discussing things online if I'm not really engaging.
You really only hurt yourself in the long run with this type of attitude. I hope you're a teenager because then it's understandable. Either way unless you engage more than a "lol ok" I'll save my toilet time for something else.
The substance is "Judges aren't checking him, and have stated they cannot"
Nah, pushing 50, and have seen this dog and pony show get worse since the 80's, with people saying, "Don't worry! Our system will keep things in check!" as all of the checks are discarded.
Let me guess, just vote bloo no matter hoo, right?