@jessetripathi@fdgarrison What is your obsession with the civil war in regards to the Commerce Clause? I honestly don’t understand your point but have seen you bring it up multiple times in the comments
Oh, is that what the case was about? The Court convened, and the justices were asked whether they liked “big business” or those with “cancer,” and seven of the nine chose “big business”? Or was it about FIFRA’s preemption clause? The press’s coverage of the law is a disaster.
>going to see the odyssey
>order popcorn
>worker asks if I want a themed bucket
>I ask her if it’s Odyssey or Iliad
>she doesn’t understand
> I pull out a chart explaining what is Odyssey and what is Iliad
>she laughs, “it’s a good bucket sir”
>get themed bucket
>it’s Iliad
And we wonder why the public doesn’t understand the Court very well? 🙄 …
how about:
“Supreme Court unanimously holds that states can’t sue companies in state court for fulfilling WWII contracts with federal government.”
Not as sexy but I guess that’s the point!
Remember, if Kagan joins a Sotomayor/Jackson opinion, it’s likely at least plausible.
If Kagan declines to join a Sotomayor/Jackson opinion, it’s definitely insane.
And if *Sotomayor* declines to join a *Jackson* opinion, you’re in for a real treat.
The alleged victim in this case, Kenneth Herring, blew through a red light and slammed into a semi-trailer, hard enough to make it tilt. An off-duty officer who approached him noticed that he seemed impaired.
/1
I was using ChatGPT for legal advice and it decided to completely hallucinate some preposterous nonsense about how growing wheat to use on my own farm somehow constitutes interstate commerce
The U.S. government spent over $7 trillion last year. More than $100 billion of that went to SNAP alone. Many billions more went to homelessness (before you even count state and local spending).
“Just tax the rich to end poverty” isn’t a serious theory of how poverty works.