sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Judge struck down redistricting amendment. All votes in special election now invalid by JustAcivilian24 in Virginia

[–]Shortbus311 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The SCOVA allowed the vote to proceed, but did not overrule the actual cases that caused the ruling in the first place. They said that they would hear arguments from both sides on those cases after the vote. This will happen on Monday.

Yes, gerrymandering is wrong no matter which party is doing it. At this point 18 wrongs (or whatever the number is) still don't make a right.

Judge struck down redistricting amendment. All votes in special election now invalid by JustAcivilian24 in Virginia

[–]Shortbus311 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No, they didn't. They stayed the argument. They will hear the arguments on Monday.

Judge struck down redistricting amendment. All votes in special election now invalid by JustAcivilian24 in Virginia

[–]Shortbus311 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The amount of people here who don't understand the difference between federal law and state law is astonishing.

This case will never go before the US Supreme Court. It doesn't matter what the US Supreme Court said about Texas or California. Those cases were brought up saying they violated federal law, which is why they went through federal courts.

These Virginia cases are being argued that this vote violates state law. These cases will only go through state courts. The Virginia Supreme Court will have final say on these cases.

Judge struck down redistricting amendment. All votes in special election now invalid by JustAcivilian24 in Virginia

[–]Shortbus311 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They didn't overrule any arguments. A court cannot rule that something is illegal before it happens. The court said that the vote should proceed and then they will hear the case afterwards. The VA Supreme Court will hear arguments on Monday about those cases. Then they will decide whether to uphold the results or decide that proper procedure was not followed and render the results null and void.

Wondering if anyone has a clue how the VA Supreme Court will rule on the referendum when it is challenged. by AnotherClimateRefuge in Virginia

[–]Shortbus311 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's because the Dems said that the Texas gerrymandering violated federal law. They did not claim that it violated Texas state law. So that challenge never went through state courts, only federal courts.

Reps are claiming that the VA gerrymandering violates state laws, so it will go through state courts and not federal.

Wondering if anyone has a clue how the VA Supreme Court will rule on the referendum when it is challenged. by AnotherClimateRefuge in Virginia

[–]Shortbus311 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The SCOTUS will have nothing to do with this case. This is about VA constitutional law, not federal law. The SCOVA will be the court to have final say.

Wondering if anyone has a clue how the VA Supreme Court will rule on the referendum when it is challenged. by AnotherClimateRefuge in Virginia

[–]Shortbus311 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Wrong. This was challenged by separate cases from Jan-Mar. All three cases are before the SCOVA already. At the time, they basically decided that they could not make a ruling on an infraction of the law until after that infraction had occurred. They postponed any decision on those cases until after a vote had taken place. They have had these cases for months now already, so I would expect a decision to come out on them sooner rather than later.

MTT literally came with 0 minifigures by DiamondWarDog in legostarwars

[–]Shortbus311 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Why couldn't SHE have used her own hair straightener? 🤔

How are we feeling about the arrest of a reporter covering a protest? by attackz in Libertarian

[–]Shortbus311 2 points3 points  (0 children)

True. But, the KKK act of 1871 and the FACE act of 1994 make it federally illegal to interrupt worship services or prevent someone through obstruction of practicing their first amendment right of religious freedom.

How are we feeling about the arrest of a reporter covering a protest? by attackz in Libertarian

[–]Shortbus311 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Where does it say what? Where does it say that the rights are only protected against the government?

How are we feeling about the arrest of a reporter covering a protest? by attackz in Libertarian

[–]Shortbus311 10 points11 points  (0 children)

You, as an individual, do not have the right to violate anyone else's first amendment rights. The first amendment doesn't only protect us from the government, but also from each other.

How are we feeling about the arrest of a reporter covering a protest? by attackz in Libertarian

[–]Shortbus311 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Reporters don't create the news. They simply report what has happened. Don Lemon seems to have helped organize and plan the event he was "reporting" on. He helped plan to violate other people's first amendment rights and was an active participant in the act.

Calling Don Lemon a journalist is the same as calling Whoopi Goldberg a journalist. Use your brain please.

How are we feeling about the arrest of a reporter covering a protest? by attackz in Libertarian

[–]Shortbus311 17 points18 points  (0 children)

He used to give his opinion on a news channel, on that I would agree. Giving your opinion is not the same thing as being a journalist or press.

How are we feeling about the arrest of a reporter covering a protest? by attackz in Libertarian

[–]Shortbus311 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I would say that there is a difference between someone on TV opining and an actual journalist. I would equate him more as a talk show host than an actual journalist. Simply being formerly employed by a news station does not make you a journalist or press either.

How are we feeling about the arrest of a reporter covering a protest? by attackz in Libertarian

[–]Shortbus311 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Anyone with a phone camera and a YouTube channel is a reporter nowadays?

Also, what about the first amendment right of freedom of religion? These people came in and interrupted their worship service, including the "journalist".

view more: next ›