He went on to argue that Report Builder sits “outside the newsroom,” since Politico’s product and engineering teams built the tool and editorial workers don’t review its outputs.
The thing that scares me most in this is the absence of a plan to fix it. If the Democrats can't call fascism fascism or lawlessness lawlessness, how can they be expected to do what's needed to unwind these atrocities when (if ever) they're back in power? And if that's not the road to recovery, then what is, short of complete collapse and starting over?
I'm not sure what the solution for nationwide injunctions is, but this can't be it. The system the Supreme Court has created means there is no realistic way to overturn even something as blatantly unconstitutional as negating birthright citizenship. There has to be a remedy for that other than every single parent individually suing the government (and potentially outing themselves as undocumented migrants in the process).
The Justices would have you believe that you can just wait for your case to get to them, but there's a massive moral hazard in the way. Why would the executive appeal any decision all the way to the Supreme Court when they can just give up on any cases they actually lose, and continue to enforce the order against everyone else?
Given its conduct in these proceedings, the Government’s posture resembles that of the arsonist who calls 911 to report firefighters for violating a local noise ordinance.
Are Supreme Court justices eligible for Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week?
How is this different to something like Masterpiece Cakeshop* or Arlene's Flowers? Cake decorating and flower arranging are clearly just as expressive as website design, especially if your clients are providing the copy and you're not being asked to personally draft a loving testimonial to the couple. Nobody is going to interpret a couple's wedding website as the personal views of the person who coded it up. I doubt you're arguing for the elimination of public accommodations laws, so where's the line you want to draw on which businesses are allowed to refuse service to protected classes and which aren't?
*Which found in favour of MC because the original decision against them was specifically hostile to a particular religious viewpoint - the Supreme Court never really decided whether it was a first amendment issue. RGB's dissent certainly seemed happy to entertain the idea that cake decorating is an expressive activity, but is nevertheless covered by anti-discrimination laws.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Bondles.
Can't do much for a buck
$1 per episode would imply they aren't even having someone listen to the episode before it's published. What could go wrong?
The thing that scares me most in this is the absence of a plan to fix it. If the Democrats can't call fascism fascism or lawlessness lawlessness, how can they be expected to do what's needed to unwind these atrocities when (if ever) they're back in power? And if that's not the road to recovery, then what is, short of complete collapse and starting over?
I'm not sure what the solution for nationwide injunctions is, but this can't be it. The system the Supreme Court has created means there is no realistic way to overturn even something as blatantly unconstitutional as negating birthright citizenship. There has to be a remedy for that other than every single parent individually suing the government (and potentially outing themselves as undocumented migrants in the process). The Justices would have you believe that you can just wait for your case to get to them, but there's a massive moral hazard in the way. Why would the executive appeal any decision all the way to the Supreme Court when they can just give up on any cases they actually lose, and continue to enforce the order against everyone else?
(And the overmedicalisation of Elon Musk, while we're at it)
Make who healthy again?
Leave the children out of it, first let's look into the damage 'digital behaviour' has done to ageing Republicans.
Isn't this a public accommodations thing?
How is this different to something like Masterpiece Cakeshop* or Arlene's Flowers? Cake decorating and flower arranging are clearly just as expressive as website design, especially if your clients are providing the copy and you're not being asked to personally draft a loving testimonial to the couple. Nobody is going to interpret a couple's wedding website as the personal views of the person who coded it up. I doubt you're arguing for the elimination of public accommodations laws, so where's the line you want to draw on which businesses are allowed to refuse service to protected classes and which aren't? *Which found in favour of MC because the original decision against them was specifically hostile to a particular religious viewpoint - the Supreme Court never really decided whether it was a first amendment issue. RGB's dissent certainly seemed happy to entertain the idea that cake decorating is an expressive activity, but is nevertheless covered by anti-discrimination laws.