There's no recourse. The federal government is immune from lawsuits for its conduct, regardless of how unconstitutional and illegal it may be. Every lawyer in the country should be screaming, but they're not! Trump is trying to force a rebellion so he can send in the troops. I fear he's going to succeed. Ordered my body armor today.
Thank you, 4th Circuit, on behalf of all of us confused and concerned citizens. Too many of the [name of your choice) docket decisions have been inexplicable. Some of them have been downright terrible, e.g., immigrant "prove your legal" stops. Many of them remain in limbo, and so do the multitude of people impacted. The Supreme Court does great damage to our faith in "justice" when they act in this seemingly arbitrary manner.
[Which typically means ignore everything before the comma.]
I've been concerned about the growing violence caused by various policies coming from the White House, specifically the unnecessarily violent actions of ICE. Similarly, the hatreds expressed by Trump and his minions are accelerating the divisions among us. Trump's call to arms last night was terrifying. I suspect we're being intentionally pushed into a situation where the only way we can protect the freedoms detailed in the Bill of Rights will require physical action beyond protests. Kavanaugh's idiotic justification for racial profiling just destroyed any credibility the Supreme Court had remaining, which seems to free the current administration to do whatever the creeps like Miller fantasize about. This is a slippery slope, and history tells us not to slide too far down before we respond. I'm not anxious to participate in another Civil War, but that may be the only way we can save our democracy.
I admire your advocacy, but I'm not convinced we can save "the news," mainly because there seems to be substantial disagreement about what news is. As you point out, hedge funds own a significant share of what used to be called newspapers. Most of those newspapers no longer carry much local news. We've lost investigative reporting, and the hedge funds won't waste their money on that. I prefer a fund that supports independent journalists, although I don't know how to correctly identify them. Or a fund that supports independent local papers (which include digital newspapers).
Incidentally, I suspect that the hedge funds are no longer getting much ROI from their newspaper acquisitions. They've cut all the staff, and the revenue must be shrinking because no one bothers to read these rags. About all that keeps them afloat are the weekly advertising inserts and some sports coverage. The history of hedge funds suggests they'll soon dump these properties, leaving someone else to pick up the pieces.
If you carefully analyze the Dobbs opinion, it becomes apparent that Alito carefully selected the "evidence" to support his opinion and ignored multiple other possibilities that would not have. It's also apparent that he's a crappy historian or just chose to ignore anything that contradicted his view. Women have been aborting fetuses for thousands of years, quietly. Notably, all of the references provided by Alito were from white males.
It would appear there's sufficient evidence to support an indictment of the officer, at the very least for manslaughter. Was the delay in the release of the report sufficient to allow the statute of limitations to expire?
It is probably not coincidental that this announcement comes on the same day that the New York Times publishes an article, "Why do we let corporations profit from rape videos?" The story is about underage girls who are filmed and posted, primarily on xvideos.com, identified publicly and forever tainted by a youthful mistake.
"The banks that connect merchants to our network will need to certify that the seller of adult content has effective controls in place to monitor, block and, where necessary, take down all illegal content."
I don't disagree with the intent, but the approach is rather heavy-handed and almost impossible to implement. How is a "seller of adult content" defined? Can a bank accurately determine that? What about a site that isn't primarily a seller of adult content by may end up hosting an adult content video, e.g, Vimeo or YouTube?
I have a much larger concern with the precedent. It's not a big step to repression of other content.
Resurrecting a tired idea: Perhaps candidates for legislative positions should be required to pass the same test required of applicants for citizenship, although that would likely eliminate almost everyone interested in the job.
"Even though I don't understand this problem, or whether there is a problem, I was elected to solve it..."
I continue to be disgusted by the ignorance continually demonstrated by those we elect to positions where they can directly influence the instantiation of new laws and regulations. I suspect that the ranks of elected officials would be severely reduced if each one had to pass the same citizenship exam as an immigrant wishing to become a U.S. citizen.
We're in an "urban interface" area where the only Internet connection we can readily obtain is crappy DSL, so we've banded together and are implementing wireless 100Mbps. Fiber would be preferable, but we're a long way from fiber and are on 5-acre lots, which makes fiber installation expensive. One of our neighbors asked for a quote from Comcast and got a response: $80,000 for just his house. (Comcast cable if about 200 yards from his house.) Not that we would actually want to deal with Comcast...
Violates common sense and the rule of law, but...
There's no recourse. The federal government is immune from lawsuits for its conduct, regardless of how unconstitutional and illegal it may be. Every lawyer in the country should be screaming, but they're not! Trump is trying to force a rebellion so he can send in the troops. I fear he's going to succeed. Ordered my body armor today.
YES!
Thank you, 4th Circuit, on behalf of all of us confused and concerned citizens. Too many of the [name of your choice) docket decisions have been inexplicable. Some of them have been downright terrible, e.g., immigrant "prove your legal" stops. Many of them remain in limbo, and so do the multitude of people impacted. The Supreme Court does great damage to our faith in "justice" when they act in this seemingly arbitrary manner.
Agree, but...
[Which typically means ignore everything before the comma.] I've been concerned about the growing violence caused by various policies coming from the White House, specifically the unnecessarily violent actions of ICE. Similarly, the hatreds expressed by Trump and his minions are accelerating the divisions among us. Trump's call to arms last night was terrifying. I suspect we're being intentionally pushed into a situation where the only way we can protect the freedoms detailed in the Bill of Rights will require physical action beyond protests. Kavanaugh's idiotic justification for racial profiling just destroyed any credibility the Supreme Court had remaining, which seems to free the current administration to do whatever the creeps like Miller fantasize about. This is a slippery slope, and history tells us not to slide too far down before we respond. I'm not anxious to participate in another Civil War, but that may be the only way we can save our democracy.
Basic problem: when the cops break the law, they don't go to jail or forfeit pay or get suspended or...anything.
Can we save "the news"?
I admire your advocacy, but I'm not convinced we can save "the news," mainly because there seems to be substantial disagreement about what news is. As you point out, hedge funds own a significant share of what used to be called newspapers. Most of those newspapers no longer carry much local news. We've lost investigative reporting, and the hedge funds won't waste their money on that. I prefer a fund that supports independent journalists, although I don't know how to correctly identify them. Or a fund that supports independent local papers (which include digital newspapers). Incidentally, I suspect that the hedge funds are no longer getting much ROI from their newspaper acquisitions. They've cut all the staff, and the revenue must be shrinking because no one bothers to read these rags. About all that keeps them afloat are the weekly advertising inserts and some sports coverage. The history of hedge funds suggests they'll soon dump these properties, leaving someone else to pick up the pieces.
If you carefully analyze the Dobbs opinion, it becomes apparent that Alito carefully selected the "evidence" to support his opinion and ignored multiple other possibilities that would not have. It's also apparent that he's a crappy historian or just chose to ignore anything that contradicted his view. Women have been aborting fetuses for thousands of years, quietly. Notably, all of the references provided by Alito were from white males.
"...Congress Needs To Act Now"
Any words placed prior to that statement are a fantasy.
Why just the Internet?
It Remains Unacceptable That Our Politicians Are So Clueless About Damn Near Everything!
We really need a basic intelligence and literacy test for those running for election at any level. Dumb and ignorant is becoming the norm.
Where's the indictment?
It would appear there's sufficient evidence to support an indictment of the officer, at the very least for manslaughter. Was the delay in the release of the report sufficient to allow the statute of limitations to expire?
Read the details carefully and see if you can figure out how they obtained the passwords to these systems or got past the firewalls...
Re:
Of course they are clearing donations to white nationalist groups. To do otherwise would be...censorship.
It is probably not coincidental that this announcement comes on the same day that the New York Times publishes an article, "Why do we let corporations profit from rape videos?" The story is about underage girls who are filmed and posted, primarily on xvideos.com, identified publicly and forever tainted by a youthful mistake.
Seems to be very poorly thought out...
"The banks that connect merchants to our network will need to certify that the seller of adult content has effective controls in place to monitor, block and, where necessary, take down all illegal content."
I don't disagree with the intent, but the approach is rather heavy-handed and almost impossible to implement. How is a "seller of adult content" defined? Can a bank accurately determine that? What about a site that isn't primarily a seller of adult content by may end up hosting an adult content video, e.g, Vimeo or YouTube?
I have a much larger concern with the precedent. It's not a big step to repression of other content.
Paypal???
"If there's any intelligence left in the legislature..."
What a novel idea, and too much to hope for.
Resurrecting a tired idea: Perhaps candidates for legislative positions should be required to pass the same test required of applicants for citizenship, although that would likely eliminate almost everyone interested in the job.
"Even though I don't understand this problem, or whether there is a problem, I was elected to solve it..."
I continue to be disgusted by the ignorance continually demonstrated by those we elect to positions where they can directly influence the instantiation of new laws and regulations. I suspect that the ranks of elected officials would be severely reduced if each one had to pass the same citizenship exam as an immigrant wishing to become a U.S. citizen.
"He who has the gold makes the rules."
Democracy was a wonderful idea, until our governments were sold to the highest bidder.
Just as stupid as the actions against Huawei, which were sponsored by lobbyists for Ericsson and Nokia.
It's this kind of WSJ "reporting" that caused me to cancel my subscription.
We're in an "urban interface" area where the only Internet connection we can readily obtain is crappy DSL, so we've banded together and are implementing wireless 100Mbps. Fiber would be preferable, but we're a long way from fiber and are on 5-acre lots, which makes fiber installation expensive. One of our neighbors asked for a quote from Comcast and got a response: $80,000 for just his house. (Comcast cable if about 200 yards from his house.) Not that we would actually want to deal with Comcast...