I cannot help your feelings of inadequacy because you spewed a bunch of posts in 5 min with no replies
Story of your life comrade. You post dozens of articles a day that no one reads or cares about.
You love that irony you just can’t stop
I cannot help your feelings of inadequacy because you spewed a bunch of posts in 5 min with no replies
Story of your life comrade.
You post dozens of articles a day that no one reads or cares about.
Yeah that is YOUR Opinion, my posts have plenty of responses ....
You love that irony you just can’t stop
Love what Irony
WTF are you trying to say here ....
You really need to concentrate on some original material, repeating someone else's lies, just makes you look more pathetic than you already are.
It’s ironic you think I care about who reads my posts when that’s what drives your entire life as evidenced by your posting habits.
It’s ironic you claim to hate AOC or her arrogance but love Trump.
Do you not see it little man?
You have no clue about that which you speak ... you make these fantasy assumptions about me based on some random internet posts on an anonymous forum
Posting neither makes Love nor Hate .... that is how progressives operate, on emotion.
ah yes the dismissive hand wav'em Ad Hominem Attack
In SCOTUS' decision, they say that which is discretionary is not their jurisdiction. Except this time.
THEY disagree that reasoning is a justifiable role in their decisions. Except this time.
But, again, I am not asking you what they've decided is their purview. I am asking whether you agree their usurpation of authority is appropriate.
Posting neither makes Love nor Hate .... that is how progressives operate, on emotion.
Again the irony is overwhelming given you make assumptions about me based on random internet posts
*of a tiny forum in the middle of nowhere.
Circling back to this comment.
The census is not discretionary. It's mandated.
There's literally case law (aka it's happened before) regarding using reasoning in their decisions.
"Usurpation of authority"?
I get you don't like the decision, but you're making this something that it's not.
I'm not talking about the census, I'm talking about the questions asked on the census. Those are discretionary, and the ruling repeatedly says the court should not be involved in discretionary decisions given to the Secretary - except, they'll make an exception in this case, 'cuz....they want to.
There is. My question to you has been unanswered, but it has been whether Chris thinks it is appropriate for the court to assume this authority.
I like the decision that he can ask the question - because that's not really anything that anyone could dispute.
The decision I don't like is that they have usurped the authority to involve themselves into discretionary measures given the executive branch.
Again, if they were asking everyone to tell their deepest darkest secret, that would be beyond the scope of the census and beyond the discretion given the executive. This is not, they say it is not, so why should they usurp that authority?
I was actually trying to get Chris' opinion, because he tends to actually think about things and discuss them in a meaningful manner - sometimes even pointing out things about which I did not previously consider and change my mind (or at least make me see something in a way I didn't before). It's rare he's dishonest or disrespectful in any way (save the recent ageist comments), so he's fun to converse with.As you flippantly said in response to a question about Trumps train of thought "Ask Trump"
So in this case "Ask the courts"