"It felt almost as if someone senior in the US wanted to stop the case ever coming to trial but didn’t want the embarrassment of withdrawing the extradition request"
What's the chance* that GOP MAGAts will come around to banning vasectomies now that the young'uns are choosing to sterilize themselves rather than face the Big Government overreach of abortion bans?
I mean, how can you enslave child-bearing folks under the boot of capitalism if they refuse to create a steady labor supply?
*The chance is very likely slim to none since the patriarchy by definition values men's rights. But still, capitalism also requires an underclass, and forced birth plunges many into that category without regard to gender.
from #CommonDreams
Morehouse Students Show Solidarity With Gaza During #Biden Commencement Speech
"It is my stance as a #Morehouse man, nay as a human being, to call for an immediate and permanent cease-fire in the #Gaza Strip," said valedictorian DeAngelo Fletcher.
I think whenever I see a headline or a person making some claim about #section230 the first reaction needs to be, “Okay, section 230 of what? What do you think that refers to?”
So many people have no idea what section 230 actually says, or does, but at least this response would help weed out the most uninformed of the people spouting out about it.
McCulloch v. Maryland was an early case from 1819 in which the State of Maryland had put a tax on a bank chartered by the federal government. The litigation stemmed from a refusal to pay the tax, and the Court of Appeals held the bank to be unconstitutional, necessitating Supreme Court review.
Ends up being the seminal "necessary & proper" case.
And the part to which she cites... is exactly that:
She cites to this part of Byrd, citing Richardson.
The context around the quoted part is, I think, extremely important. (Image 2).
It not only notes that the court's role is not general supervision, but that the "irreplaceable value of [judicial review]" is its protection of individual liberties.