Reply With Quote
You know he is ignoring you, not.No , dumbass.
"ignore"
He fantasizes about you and WH, wearing masks, sequestered in a bedroom, wearing togas!
Get ready for his interview.
Babies in the womb have no say by definition unless you say you can hear them somehow.
Can you literally hear them?
Yes or no.
This answer will count if you don't dodge it like the last two.
You won't save any unwanted babies yourself so what do you care?
You know he is ignoring you, not.No , dumbass.
He fantasizes about you and WH, wearing masks, sequestered in a bedroom, wearing togas!
Get ready for his interview.
He uses alts to reply to me now.You know he is ignoring you, not.
He fantasizes about you and WH, wearing masks, sequestered in a bedroom, wearing togas!
Get ready for his interview.
So I guess we can slaughter all mutes too. We cant hear them either. Yes or no?
You should keep saying Brandon is conservative, loudly. I don't think your fellow conservatives can hear you.
Maybe they have wax in their ears, or refuse to remove the blindfold.
as much as I've posted in this forum, I'd venture I've cited a greater variety of right wing rags than anyone here.
Reason, Commentary, First Things, Chronicles, AmConMag, National Review, the American Standard, I can go on if you'd like.
They certainly have a say since they can clearly communicate their wishes.
You won't personally save any unwanted babies yourself so what do you care?
The SCOTUS made no mention or ruling on the Cons utionality of the law yet... heard arguments, and that's it. Eventually they'll have to rule on that, and we'll see what happens then.
They'll uphold the MS law and then strike the TX one down as proof that they're not Republican judges but instead honest brokers.
If they uphold the MS law, why would they need to strike down the TX law?
To set precedent so California can't pass a law to pay people to sue gun stores.
makes sense, but then why did they allow the law to stand under challenge instead of granting the preliminary injunction? that move effectively bans abortion in Texas. hard to imagine they'd do the same for a CA law permitting vigilante lawsuits against gun sales.
Because it bans abortion in Texas until they make the ruling.
That's what I think too. They're temporizing to overturn Roe v Wade.
I think they're taking their time to make sure this loophole is closed. Whether they determine the whole thing is uncons utional or if they flex some mental gymnastics and decide the SCOTUS erred 48 years ago finding that abortion is protected under the 14th amendment of the Cons ution, they will need to make sure that they'll close the book on attempts of State laws nullifying federal law. That is indeed prima-facie uncons utional, but it's made very complicated due to he fact that they also can't deny private citizens access to the courts.
This is without a doubt causing undue burden on abortion clinics in Texas, but ultimately the matter in front of them transcends abortion.
If you think about it, it's a legal loophole, and the natural and proper venue to address it is Congress via a federal law (and this encompasses more than just abortion, but any other right).
I'm not holding my breath. Why hasn't there been a federal law legalizing abortion nationwide?
Not talking about abortion specifically, but about allowing States to enact laws that put the burden of enforcement on private citizens in order to skirt liability.
In other words, States cannot dodge their responsibility/liability for laws they wrote only because they're not the enforcers of the provisions they put on them.
What this gambit is basically doing is legalizing frivolous lawsuits by fudging legal standing.
The rest should already be covered by the supremacy clause of the Cons ution.
Same reason there hasn't been one legalizing gun ownership nationwide.
Fear, fundraising and getting elected.
smdh
what's the reason?
why do you hide behind rhetorical questions? your pattern of not making your own point grates, tbh.
In response to Texas abortion law, California Gov. Gavin Newsom says he is working on a bill to allow private citizens to sue anyone who makes or sells assault weapons
https://news.yahoo.com/response-texa...043752660.html
Newsom; ever the fart catcher.In response to Texas abortion law, California Gov. Gavin Newsom says he is working on a bill to allow private citizens to sue anyone who makes or sells assault weapons
https://news.yahoo.com/response-texa...043752660.html
Dems haven't had enough seats, esp in the Senate. Thanks, Cons ution, for minority rule
You got "Manchin'ed." Just like we did.
ha, ha.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
