@jappleby I’ve avoided posting for years now, but as someone who actually cares about policy and civility, I feel compelled to point out that you’re the problem. You would rather patronize your own party (while getting shit on day in and day out) than fight back. You’re a loser.
If you’re concerned by churches receiving billions of dollars in PPP loans, then this is the Note for you. I explain how the Court’s gradual destruction of the Establishment Clause paved the way for public funding of religion and what the future may hold if things don’t change.
"One Nation Subsidizing God: How the Implementation of the Paycheck Protection Program Revealed the Deteriorating Wall Between Church and State" by Vol. 106 Senior Articles Editor @Elliot_Ergeson is out now in Issue 6! Read it here:
https://t.co/pVSe4hAzSl
@tksharmalaw @PFF_Brad Yeah it’s a really bad provision to have in that deal. There’s so much unnecessary risk and uncertainty for Julio due to that. I’ll never understand why they didn’t use statistical metrics that actually reflect a player’s value as opposed to what writers across the country think.
@DanSuitor Which is why I am tremendously thankful section A had property in the fall with Kark. The man’s commitment to making sure we understood RAP/future interest, and recording statute problems made a world of difference for bar prep.
The 4th Amendment still applies to the government when it is acting as an employer. That’s day one stuff. It’s truly remarkable how people can be so confidently wrong.
This unsolicited advice from @mjs_DC is worth what the law clerks paid for it. This isn't a criminal investigation, and any law clerk who values his or her job at the Court and the perks that job carries with it going forward would be smart to cooperate with this inquiry.
So, anytime they point to the Constitution as a justification for taking rights away, they are ignoring the Constitution’s own terms. They are solely concerned with rewriting the Constitution to fit their worldview of religious illiberalism.
Conservative Justices are lying when they say unenumerated rights have no basis in the Constitution. The Ninth Amendment is clear: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.