It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Biden--Too Senile to Stand Trial (SC)--But NOT Too Senile to be President?

page: 10
20
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2024 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: YourFaceAgain

You may not think that states gerrymandering federal election affects the nation, but Justice Ketanji Brown seemed to be concerned about it, and used as an example how Jim Crow laws were able to infiltrate states, through states' rights issues, in spite of the 14th Amendment, until the Civil Rights Act of the 1960s.

If justices are concerned of the fallout of one state being able to eliminate a candidate on 14th Amendment disqualifications, that could affect national elections, then they should be equally concerned about states that rig national elections through gerrymandering.



edit on 0120242024k02America/Chicago2024-02-10T12:02:01-06:0012pm2024-02-10T12:02:01-06:00 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2024 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

SCOTUS can't act until somebody files lawsuits. Why hasn't that happened yet if it's such a big concern?

😀



posted on Feb, 10 2024 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: WingDingLuey

Uhm...This isn't SCOTUS' first states' rights rodeo.



To be clear, cases like Cooper establish that federal courts may sometimes intervene when states draw racial gerrymanders, meaning that voters were sorted because of their race. But cases challenging partisan gerrymanders — maps that sort voters based on whether they are Democrats or Republicans — will typically be dismissed by federal courts thanks to Rucho.



Though the full Court has never struck down a partisan gerrymander for engaging in viewpoint discrimination, at least five justices have, at various times, endorsed the view that such gerrymanders violate the First Amendment. As Justice Elena Kagan wrote in her Rucho dissent, the First Amendment “gives its greatest protection to political beliefs, speech, and association,” but partisan gerrymanders “subject certain voters to ‘disfavored treatment’ — again, counting their votes for less — precisely because of ‘their voting history [and] their expression of political views.’”

www.vox.com...



posted on Feb, 10 2024 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Degradation33

Another one who doesn't understand how your rights work and where they come from.

Oppressive government overreach does not remove your rights. You still have them they are simply being trampled on, whether an overzealous police officer arrests you without just cause or an overzealous Court falsely says the right isn't granted by the Constitution (and again, the Constitution doesn't grant rights.)

By the same token, an overreaching Court cannot falsely create a new right. Whether it takes a day, a decade, or a century for their illegal ruling to be overturned, the right does not exist just because the Court oversteps its authority and says it does.

I'm sorry these concepts can't be distilled down to the oversimplified form that is all some of you can understand.



posted on Feb, 10 2024 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Rumors circulating: High rank Democrats getting instructions to start dumping Biden!!!!
MSM next.
Kamala will be sworn in.
The chaos will cause an election cancelation/suspension ⚠️❓



posted on Feb, 10 2024 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: WingDingLuey

Ayup...



posted on Feb, 10 2024 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Well , he has a Point here............





posted on Feb, 10 2024 @ 07:59 PM
link   
He dun got all blowed up and madd 😃


Report: Biden 'Blew up' in Private Over Special Counsel Report


Privately, Biden was also furious about the report’s comments on his memory. During a private meeting with House Democrats at their policy retreat in Virginia earlier Thursday, Biden grew especially animated when asked how he was doing,

“How the f--- could I forget the day my son died? Of course I remember everything,” he said, according two people with knowledge of his remarks who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a closed-door conversation.

At his White House remarks, Biden began by stressing that the report concluded that charges were not merited, even citing specific page numbers to bolster his case.

“I was pleased to see he reached the firm conclusion that no charges should be brought against me in this case,” the president said. “This was an exhaustive investigation.”

He also highlighted a separate investigation into former president Donald Trump’s own handling of classified documents, and the differences between them — notably that Trump allegedly sought to keep the documents even when authorities asked for them back and that he, unlike Biden, now faces criminal charges.






The Final Word Speaks!! 🤤







top topics



 
20
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join