Robust Mirror

Fair point.

I was definitely too focused on the narrow “did they rule on birthright citizenship” question and missed the bigger picture. You’re right that this is way more than just procedural, it’s a massive shift in executive power.

The fact that federal judges can now only issue piecemeal, state-by-state rulings essentially breaks their ability to actually check presidential overreach in any meaningful way.

I think I got too caught up in fact checking the specific headline and missed how big Trump’s win actually was here, just not in the way the headlines suggested. Thanks for the correction.

100% on both counts.

The forum shopping issue you’re describing is exactly the problem. Trump’s team can now basically pick and choose where to implement policies that have been ruled unconstitutional elsewhere. It creates this patchwork where your constitutional rights depend on geography, which is obviously fucked.

And you’re spot on about the cowardice. The Supreme Court absolutely should have ruled on the constitutional question first. That’s the actual substantive issue everyone cares about. Instead they took the cop out that gives Trump more power without having to make the hard call on whether his order is constitutional.

Honestly it looks like classic Roberts Court behaviour: make big changes to how government works while pretending you’re just doing technical legal housekeeping. They know damn well that ruling on birthright citizenship would be messy and politically explosive, so they found a way to help Trump without having to own the constitutional implications.

Your point about this cutting both ways (like with mifepristone) is important too, but the timing here makes it pretty clear what they’re really doing.

Looking into it this whole thing is way more complicated than the headline makes it sound. The Supreme Court didn’t actually give Trump permission to end birthright citizenship, they just made a ruling about how courts can block federal policies nationwide.

Basically what happened: Trump’s birthright citizenship order has been blocked by multiple federal judges who said it’s probably unconstitutional. Instead of arguing the constitutional issue (which he’d probably lose), Trump’s team asked the Supreme Court to limit judges’ power to issue nationwide blocks on policies. The Court agreed 6-3, but they specifically did NOT rule on whether ending birthright citizenship is legal.

So now Trump’s celebrating like he won, but really all that changed is the procedural stuff. The constitutional problems with his order are still there: the 14th Amendment is pretty clear about birthright citizenship. Lower courts still have to reconsider their rulings, and immigrant rights groups are already filing new lawsuits.

It’s more of a tactical win for Trump that might let him try to implement parts of his agenda in some places, but the fundamental legal challenges haven’t gone away. The Truthout article is at least a little hyperbolic imo.

The “mysterious” they is HerelAm, the person I was replying to you ninny.

You’re literally arguing nothing right now. THEY took the position we should have brackets defining the order in every single equation or otherwise have them as undefined TODAY. It doesn’t matter when they were invented. Obviously it’s never been written like that. They are the one arguing it SHOULD BE. I said that would be stupid vs following the left to right convention already established. You’re getting caught up in the semantics of the wording.

What you inferred: they’re saying brackets were always around and we chose left to right to avoid bracket mess.

What I was actually saying: we chose and continue to choose to keep using the left to right convention over brackets everywhere because it would be unnecessary and make things more cluttered.

And yes, that IS a position mathematicians COULD have chosen once brackets WERE invented. They could have decided we should use them in every equation for absolute clarity of order. Saying we should not do that based on tradition alone is a bad reason.

The “always been the case” argument could justify any legacy system. We don’t still use Roman numerals for arithmetic just because they were traditional. Things DO change.

Ancient Greeks and Romans strongly resisted zero as a concept, viewing it as philosophically problematic. Negative numbers were even more controversial with many mathematicians into the Renaissance calling them “fictitious” or “absurd numbers.” It took centuries for these to become accepted as legitimate mathematical objects.

Before Robert Recorde introduced “=” in 1557, mathematicians wrote out “is equal to” in words. Even after its introduction, many resisted it for decades, preferring verbal descriptions or other symbols.

I could go on but if you’re going to argue why something shouldn’t be the case, you should argue more than “it’s tradition” or “we’ve done fine without it so far”. Because they did fine with many things in mathematics until they decided they needed to change or expand it.

Baseball, huh?

Sometimes that’s true. Not all times. But some shows have a weak season 1 but then get amazing. And you can’t really skip it without losing context.

Pakistan could back Iran while India backs Israel. It has the potential to escalate.

We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran :3 A full payload of HUGS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow uwu All planes are safely on their way home with cookies! NOW IS THE TIME FOR CUDDLES! Thank you for your attention to this matter ^_^

Going in blind so sorry if this is a repeat:

God’s Juice.

They said when decluttering. Most of those things aren’t in question when you’re specifically decluttering. No one looks at their mess and thinks “maybe getting rid of my mattress, couch, phone and TV would make things cleaner”.

Definitely not.

Yeah this is like making out a monitor having a dead pixel is some huge scandal and discredit to that company.

It’s different to the point I sometimes go back to 8 for the more traditional format. That isn’t something that has ever been the case for me across other mario kart games.

Yeah I don’t think I’ve ever taken a 12 minute poop in my life.

Well that would be nice if everyone was on board. But even if the people that hate him don’t turn up, the people that love him will. That would be enough for him.

Devils advocate: If we can say ACAB because even the “good” ones are complicit via not stepping in to stop the bad ones and letting the bad situations happen, why is this equivalent situation different?

At least Luthor is actually intelligent.

Yes! The tree lights up green if you’re pregnant and red if you’re not. It can flash between them while you’re waiting, and sometimes it will randomly hold just a tiny bit longer to keep suspense high.

It could always play it if you reminded it of the board state every move. Not well, but at least generally legally. And while I know elites can play chess blind, the average person can’t, so it was always kind of harsh to hold it to that standard and criticise it not being able to remember more than 5 moves when most people can’t do that themselves.

Besides that, it was never designed to play chess. It would be like insulting Watson the Jeopardy bot for losing against the Atari chess bot, it’s not what it was designed to do.