Helvereos wrote:Not to be rude or anything, but the US needs to stop its f****t-y ways; even Elton John is calling them gay.
Say what?
Advertisement

by Vettrera » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:29 am
Helvereos wrote:Not to be rude or anything, but the US needs to stop its f****t-y ways; even Elton John is calling them gay.

by Wamitoria » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:30 am

by Umbra Ac Silentium » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:30 am
The Holy Therns wrote:Your thought pattern is so bizarre I can't even be offended anymore.

by Welsh Cowboy » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:31 am

by The Black Forrest » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:32 am
Neo Art wrote:But yeah, between the "actually, I'm pretty sure Roberts is gonna swing the vote for upholding Obamacare on federalist tax principles" and going 3 for 3 on this one (including calling the 5-4 breakdown), I'm still virtually certain I'm still going to continue to get a plethora of "well, if you were a REAL lawyer...."


by Greed and Death » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:34 am

by Zokorias personal views » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:34 am

by Oneracon » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:34 am
Umbra Ac Silentium wrote:Hip hip hooray, the wicked witch is dead.
Compass
Economic Left/Right: -8.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.72
| Pro: | LGBTQ+ rights, basic income, secularism, gun control, internet freedom, civic nationalism, non-military national service, independent Scotland, antifa |
| Anti: | Social conservatism, laissez-faire capitalism, NuAtheism, PETA, capital punishment, Putin, SWERF, TERF, GamerGate, "Alt-right" & neo-Nazism, Drumpf, ethnic nationalism, "anti-PC", pineapple on pizza |

by Greed and Death » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:36 am
Neo Art wrote:DogDoo 7 wrote:Yeah, but the district court only has jurisdiction over the northern half of California. Nowhere else needs to listen to him.
That's not necessarily true when it comes to matter of state law. The court struck down a state law, the district court has the power to do that, and it affects the entire state.
When it comes ot FEDERAL law, the federal district court is binding only in the district, but when it comes to state law, the district court is binding on the state.

by Greed and Death » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:37 am
The Black Forrest wrote:Neo Art wrote:But yeah, between the "actually, I'm pretty sure Roberts is gonna swing the vote for upholding Obamacare on federalist tax principles" and going 3 for 3 on this one (including calling the 5-4 breakdown), I'm still virtually certain I'm still going to continue to get a plethora of "well, if you were a REAL lawyer...."
Well, if you were a REAL lawyer you wouldn't complain about comments of "well, if you were a REAL lawyer....."

by Mr Summertime Noposts » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:37 am
Helvereos wrote:Not to be rude or anything, but the US needs to stop its f****t-y ways; even Elton John is calling them gay.

by Neo Art » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:38 am
greed and death wrote:Neo Art wrote:
That's not necessarily true when it comes to matter of state law. The court struck down a state law, the district court has the power to do that, and it affects the entire state.
When it comes ot FEDERAL law, the federal district court is binding only in the district, but when it comes to state law, the district court is binding on the state.
I thought because the state was a party it was bound by the injunction against enforcing the law.

by Helvereos » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:39 am

by Zocra » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:40 am

by The Black Forrest » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:40 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Dimetrodon Empire, Dogmeat, Emotional Support Crocodile, Ifreann, Independent Galactic States, Mtwara, Spirit of Hope, Sunlit Uplands, Tillania
Advertisement