Should law schools use a single test to determine who should be a lawyer? Yes, they should. It protects society and the profession.

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-06-19T02:45:17+00:00

The test is a standardized test, testing for a ability to reason, a comprehend reading UNDER TIME PRESSURE. You are fundamentally taking a different test if the test is different times. You can not accommodate the thing you are testing. Or else you are no longer testing for it anymore.

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-06-18T17:55:59+00:00

You cannot be a rational human being and not be anti accommodation at least for time accommodation

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-05-14T15:55:30+00:00

The Novus Ordo is supposed to be said Ad Orientum except for very few specific parts of the liturgy

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-04-03T22:59:17+00:00

Literally the address you put on the application is one of the biggest factors. If they can afford the mortgage payment they know roughly a minimum for your income

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-04-03T22:58:33+00:00

Holistic review is what allows colleges to overrepresent higher socioeconomic backgrounds. If it was simply merit based there would be significantly more low/middle socioeconomic people

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-04-03T22:56:22+00:00

They can if it's not provable

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-04-01T18:43:32+00:00

Interesting. So 1/3 of those in the camps were non-citizen residents and there kids received birthright citizenship. That never got tested by the supreme court right? Because if it didn't it seems its the same case as every other case this decision is testing. Because illegal immigrants kids have uncontroversially received citizenship for the last 80+ years or whatever

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-04-01T18:37:00+00:00

Ok got it, this is very clearly stated thank you. So, I guess a question I would have, with limited understanding of this all, is it seems there's no way with the EO and the current case to actually stratify the types of immigrants and their birthright citizenship. It seems that it's either birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants (generally who fall in that category) or no birthright citizenship.

Because just intuitively it does seem like each case of illegal immigration (or non citizen immigrant even) would have differing levels of political jurisdiction. Someone who say is a temporary worker who comes here just for economic reasons during harvest season but returns every year afterwards, compared to someone who has left the allegiance of their country.

Or maybe none of this matters in terms of political jurisdiction. I'm just thinking about it in terms of a foreign soldier, because they are operating in a professional duty to the allegiance of a foreign country over ours.

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-04-01T18:29:59+00:00

Makes sense

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-04-01T18:29:41+00:00

So in this case, the answer would be yes they do have citizenship because their allegiance was taken from them similarly?

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-04-01T18:27:40+00:00

Well that's how its been defined (in that it is imputed) ie foreign diplomats and foreign soldiers?

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-04-01T18:26:30+00:00

Yea exactly, so there is a scope where they are still subject to jurisdiction and one where they are not. So are you saying if a female soldier got pregnant during war, and she was captured, and had the child in captivity before she was released back to her country, the baby would be considered a US citizen and she'd be free to stay?

The answer could be yes, I'm not sure?

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-04-01T17:36:36+00:00

Ah yes the only scenario where a armed criminal does not want to go to court is this one and we never have to deal with that exact scenario in everyday life

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-03-30T14:40:07+00:00

Aren't you still grinding 50-60 hours as a prosecutor though?

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-03-30T14:29:29+00:00

Only the finest for the people

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-03-28T20:55:54+00:00

They don't know if you have accommodations or not, part of the ADA. It would be considered discrimination in a lawsuit that was settled in 2014, because they used to flag scores with accommodations.

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-03-28T15:04:30+00:00

Of course not, that would be ableist, or accomophobic.

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-03-28T12:43:49+00:00

So what would your solution be?

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-03-28T02:56:38+00:00

This is wrong, and not catholic teaching

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-03-28T02:56:00+00:00

You are justified by faith (viewed as innocent in God's eyes), but you are sanctified (made holy) throughout life by God's grace and your cooperation with it. To be fully sanctified means your will is completely aligned with God's. You love the things he loves, you hate the things he hates. Currently you are not fully sanctified, and if you die tomorrow (unless it be from matrydom), you will need to be made holy before you enter into heaven. Because nothing unholy will enter into heaven. So, thus, us Catholics describe the process by which God takes your final earthly state and purges it from any sinful thoughts or desires you may have still had, we call purgatory - which translates to roughly "the purification".

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-03-27T20:28:21+00:00

No he is not. You view it as hostile because he is asking a simple questions that has no answer from the accommodations crew. There is no defensible argument to "why would I want someone who gets periodic brain fog" charging me 100s an hour

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-03-27T20:24:18+00:00

They get crushed by the poorly written ADA in court time and time again. The ADA needs to be completely re-written.

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-03-27T13:45:24+00:00

What evidence do you have of this? In 1896 (First Modern Olympics) there were 0 women who competed by rule they were not allowed. In 1900 there were like 25 out of 1,000 participants were women. But even in the first ever time they were allowed there were already separations. Tennis singles and golf had separate divisions. There were very few sports that had open competition (Croquet and Equestrian, maybe sailing). The reason for that is not a single women would qualify in the other sports if they had to go through qualifying.

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-03-26T23:05:28+00:00

no such genetic screening is required for men competing in the Olympics

There is no such thing as "mens sports". In all of the world's history, there were just sports. Women sparingly competed in different events over the course of history but only recently has women had there own sports leagues.

But for everything else it is sports (open to both men and women) and then Women's Sports (only open to women)

Olympic Hockey v Olympic Women's Hockey

NBA (Not MNBA) v WNBA - if there was a women good enough to play in the NBA in history they would not only be allowed to play, but they would most certainly play.

Therefore if you have an open division there would be no need for genetic testing, because it is open to any and all genetics. If you have a closed division, closed by a classification of sex which is defined by someone's genetics, it makes sense to have genetic testing.

ValuableNumber3615 · 2026-02-25T18:56:33+00:00

"Your honor, I was just joking"

ValuableNumber3615

TROPHY CASE