Kentucky’s State House of Representatives passed, by a large margin (69-20) a bill that would outlaw most abortions, contingent on the Supreme Court overturning Roe v Wade.
If passed by the State’s Senate (expected) and signed by the Governor (also expected), it’ll have legal problems, though. Major ones will be what constitutes “overturning,” how an actual overturn would be discriminated from serious modification of Roe‘s ruling, and since Roe is medical technology oriented, a restatement of the threshold for viability.
Still, though, the arguments for and against the bill are instructive.
State Congressman James Tipton (R), speaking for the bill, put the matter starkly:
Now it’s Twitter that’s engaging in toxic (non)-speech, not the speech in the tweets themselves.
A Canadian blogger is having to sue Twitter over the latter’s blatant censorship of free speech because, apparently, she isn’t toeing the Twitter (or me also “movement”) sexual politics line.
Meghan Murphy, the founder of the blog Feminist Current, was locked out of her account last year when the company asked her to delete a tweet that said, “Men aren’t women,” CNET reported, citing the lawsuit. A second tweet said, “How are transwomen not men?” according to the suit.
Authorities say the homeowner defended himself when the suspects entered the home. Following the shooting, the suspects fled from the scene.
At another scene, a vehicle was found about two blocks from the shooting, where a man was found dead in the backseat.
Authorities say that out of five people shot, three of them died. All were suspects in the alleged home invasion.
More European nations have recognized the Guaidó government as the legitimate government of Venezuela following the passing of those nations’ Sunday deadline for Maduro to schedule free elections with no action by Maduro (though left unaddressed is the conundrum of how Maduro could schedule anything if he’s not the legitimate head of government).
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin demurs.
…domestic issues should be solved by Venezuela and its people. “Attempts to legitimize usurped power” constitute “interference in Venezuela’s internal affairs….”
Senator Bernie Sanders (I, VT), who caucuses with the Progressive-Democrats, has joined the Progressive-Democratic Party’s race to the bottom. The President wannabe has proposed his cynically named For the 99.8% Act, which is targeted explicitly against the 588 Americans he hates the most: the 588 most successful of us. His bill would deny these few Americans their ability to pass on the outcome of their success to their heirs, their families; his bill would overtly punish these most successful—and their families—for their success.
It’s a bill that’s borne of personal animosity and rank envy. It’s a bill that would
The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, is under fire and in the courts over its fundamentally racist admissions policy. Plaintiffs are arguing that UNC violates Supreme Court rulings by giving too much weight to applicants’ race. The problem, though, is that any weight to race is too much, is fundamentally racist. The Supreme Court’s rulings don’t go far enough to bar this behavior. As things stand, though, the plaintiffs have a case IMNSHO.
French President Emmanuel Macron has embarked on a “debating tour” of France in response to the uproar surrounding his gas tax increases, decision to impose from the center a “carbon free” economy on France, and the yellow vest demonstrations against first the tax increases and subsequently in broader opposition to that overweening centrality of governance.
And Macron laid bare his basic misunderstanding of his own political environment and of the nature of French sovereignty. He’s already met with 600 mayors in Normandy, and there he laid out his basic tenets.
In a ruling rejecting an application for a search warrant, Magistrate Judge Kandis Westmore, operating in the Northern District of California, had this remark in particular.
Citizens do not contemplate waiving their civil rights when using new technology, and the Supreme Court has concluded that, to find otherwise, would leave individuals “at the mercy of advancing technology.”
Encouragingly, this remark also cited (via the quote in the remark above) a Supreme Court ruling, Carpenter vUnited States [citations omitted]: