I think it was Kari Lake who said migrants bring their women and children. Invaders travel solo.
who care if they are healthy. They are flat out immoral.
Time to get a Mastercard- Visa is on the list!
AWESOME AWESOME AWESOME!
yeah--when I read stuff like this and hear nothing about what they are doing to stop it, I am very very upset. I can only hope that this is being tackled quietly. But nightmare is an understatement.
He's a dead man before November.
Can you have sedition against an unlawful occupant?
Change is not going to happen overnight. And it took decades to get this bad. The Agencies will continue to do business as usual until they are forced to change and their regulations are challenged by an aggrieved party with proper standing. Federal Regulations are "promulgated" by publishing them in the Federal Register for a specific number of days (required notice and comment period) and thereafter the new regulation (in reality a law) get added to the regulation book and the Agency cites that as authority for what they do. Congress and the people have no say. (who sits around and reads the Federal Register? It's really sneaky actually). The Agency practice will not internally change until challenged in a Court of law. At which time Loper will control and the Agency will lose because Chevron is dead. But it will be one drop at a time wearing away on a very big rock.
The Supreme Court also overruled Chevron today. LOPER BRIGHT ENTERPRISES ET AL. v. RAIMONDO, SECRETARY OF COMMERCE, ET AL.
That was the point I think. Now they have public justification for replacing him as the candidate. I next expect a somber announcement that he will not be seeking a second term.
We all need to remember that nothing and I mean NOTHING happens to a person who is born again and in the Body of Christ without it first passing through His fingers. Moreover, all that happens to a Child of the King is intended for his growth and spiritual good to make us more like Him. That includes every bad thing happening to you individually and to us as a society and people and country. The worse it gets the less I like it here and the more I look forward to going home. I recently realized that my love for here is growing dim with discouragement and my hope for home with the Lord is growing. So even as bad as it all gets, there is a good outcome. But we need spiritual eyes to see it. Do you have them? That is a first step.....seek the Lord while He may be found.
Compared to waddling poopy pants little boy doing what he is told Joe ......
Don't forget Moderna.
it is not there
those poor citizens left there and suffering.....unimaginable to even poor Americans...so sad, so sad
In one fell swoop, no more cargo in or out, US Navy Rapid deployment ships are bottled up ,and the Coast Guard yard is out of commission. That is a whole lot of consequences.
Actually, I think the number of abortions in the US rose after Dobbs.
Romans 2:4....Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and restraint and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?
you tube removed this video..hmmm
Yep there ARE lots of others!! My husband and I were both threatened with losing our jobs if we did not get vaxed. I resisted and ultimately obtained a medical exemption. He could have gotten one too as he has DM2 and we have a very great doc who was willing to provide the exemption. But he let this masculine wiring to provide for the family dominate his decision. I love and respect him for that self sacrificial attitude though! He tried with all his might to do the right thing for us. So folks - don't be so harsh on spouses who do what appears to be the right thing at the time. Hindsight is 20/20. And yes, my health has now been affected greatly by the shedding and I will never be the same either.
Count Maryland in. Get a driver's license with no proof of citizenship and only an address in Maryland and you can VOTE in the Deep State of Maryland.
I am having no issues here in Maryland. Might be local?
Maryland: "The California of the East and where the Deep State Lives", has enacted a new twist on voting rights. Despite the fact that the National Voting Right Act requires voter rolls be cleaned up, Maryland has instituted an oath with criminal penalties for anyone who gets the voter roles and then uses them for their intended purpose. The Gateway Pundit also reported on this as well https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/09/maryland-election-board-quietly-changes-rules-threatens-legal/.
These folks work overtime to find ways to get around all our Constitutional rights and then spend their time doing the do the most stupid stuff. Marylanders now have a * right* to be free of harassing telemarketing calls because they passed the Stop the Spam Calls Act Now. Priorities are whacky.
ANSWER: Not for a very long time.
In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court overruled Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984), which held that, if a statute is silent or ambiguous with respect to a specific issue, a court must defer to an agency’s reasonable construction of the statute, even if the court would have construed the statute differently. Loper Bright instead held that “[c]ourts must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority.” No. 22-1219, 2024 U.S. LEXIS 2882, at *61-62 (June 28, 2024). The Court preemptively opined that Chevron’s overruling does not undermine the respect that precedents applying Chevron are entitled to under the doctrine of stare decisis. This explicit admonition will likely be followed by courts in most circumstances. See, e.g., DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. United States, 361 F.3d 1378, 1385 n.3 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (“Notably, even if dicta, we would feel obligated to follow the Supreme Court's explicit and carefully considered statements . . . .”).
Going forward, Loper Bright will clearly alter the formal manner in which U.S. Courts adjudicate cases involving the interpretation of and Agencies statutes. An Agency’s interpretation of the statutes it implements will no longer receive the sort of broad deference Chevron afforded. Instead, arguments will be considered for their persuasive value in accordance with Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U. S. 134, 140 (1944) (considering an agency’s interpretation of a statute based upon “the thoroughness evident in its consideration, the validity of its reasoning, its consistency with earlier and later pronouncements, and all those factors which give it power to persuade, if lacking power to control”).
The practical effect of Chevron’s demise will vary depending on the specifics of every case. As the Court observed in Loper Bright, the question of deference under Chevron was not even reached unless a court determined that the statute was ambiguous with respect to a certain issue, and individual judges answered the ambiguity question in very different ways. 2024 U.S. LEXIS 2882, at *55 (“Ambiguity is a term that may have different meanings for different judges. One judge might see ambiguity everywhere; another might never encounter it.” (cleaned up)). Thus, even while Chevron was on the books, a court could avoid deferring to an agency interpretation if the court could discern a clear answer to the statutory question.
Yet whatever the effects going forward, the Loper Bright Court was explicit that the overruling of Chevron should not upset the stare decisis value of past judicial decisions applying Chevron:
"By doing so, however, we do not call into question prior cases that relied on the Chevron framework. The holdings of those cases that specific agency actions are lawful—including the Clean Air Act holding of Chevron itself—are still subject to statutory stare decisis despite our change in interpretive methodology. See CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries, 553 U. S. 442, 457 (2008). Mere reliance on Chevron cannot constitute a “‘special justification’” for overruling such a holding, because to say a precedent relied on Chevron is, at best, “just an argument that the precedent was wrongly decided.” Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., 573 U. S. 258, 266 (2014)(quoting Dickerson v. United States, 530 U. S. 428, 443 (2000)). That is not enough to justify overruling a statutory precedent.2024 U.S. LEXIS 2882, at *60-61.
This passage will be a critical source of authority for an Agency in arguing that previously settled statutory interpretations should not be revisited or upset simply because those interpretations relied on Chevron. It would be difficult for courts to evade Loper Bright’s admonition on this point.
But there is still a risk that courts could purport to discern exceptions to that admonition in particular cases. As the Loper Bright dissent observed: “Courts motivated to overrule an old Chevron-based decision can always come up with something to label a ‘special justification.’ Maybe a court will say ‘the quality of the precedent’s reasoning’ was poor. Or maybe the court will discover something ‘unworkable’ in the decision—like some exception that has to be applied.” 2024 U.S. LEXIS 2882, at *153 (Kagan, J., dissenting) (cleaned up).
Chevron’s overruling is most likely to tempt courts to revisit precedent that applied Chevron’s framework in circumstances where (1) there was disagreement among judges about whether the statute was silent or ambiguous on a particular issue; and (2) the decision of the court, even if unanimous, expressed doubt that the agency’s interpretation was the best one or opined that the court would have interpreted the statute differently but for Chevron.
In sum, although Loper Bright overruled Chevron, the Court attempted to preempt use of the overruling as a basis to revisit settled precedent applying Chevron. The Court’s admonition provides clear language that an Agency should invoke as appropriate, and with which courts are generally likely to abide. But there is still a risk that courts will revisit previously settled statutory questions in circumstances where Chevron’s application was controversial.