1
Nolagirl99 1 point ago +1 / -0

Here’s the sentencing document…

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.539612/gov.uscourts.nysd.539612.657.0.pdf

Basically, some of the charges were the same. It’s the idea of double jeopardy. Can’t be prosecuted and sentenced twice for the same action. The jury found her guilty on some of the charges but the court felt they were the same charge so the “counts” were dismissed. She couldn’t be sentenced twice for the same offense.

1
Nolagirl99 1 point ago +1 / -0

My boss always teases me he wants the short answer! Hopefully it explained the appeals process. Most important take away I see is them putting back in the hands of the states and trying to set precedent for rights.

2
Nolagirl99 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is going to be long winded… going to go into some detail for anyone having a hard time understanding the history.

Basic definition: A petition that asks an appellate court to grant a writ of certiorari. This type of petition usually argues that a lower court has incorrectly decided an important question of law, and that the mistake should be fixed to prevent confusion in similar cases.

My sister (teaches gov’t) and I have been having a healthy discussion on this. The 9th amendment was instilled by our forefathers as a way to make sure the federal govt didn’t infringe on other rights of the people not mentioned. It’s controversial in the sense that interpretation has been argued endlessly over time. It kind of became a catch all amendment.

“ supporters of the Constitution (“Federalists”) such as James Wilson argued that a bill of rights would be dangerous. Enumerating any rights, Wilson argued, might imply that all those not listed were surrendered. And, because it was impossible to enumerate all the rights of the people, a bill of rights might actually be construed to justify the government’s power to limit any liberties of the people that were not enumerated.”

https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/amendment-ix/interps/131

Moving on…. The 14th amendment added during the reconstruction in 1868 prohibited the states from depriving any person of “life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” and from denying anyone within a state’s jurisdiction equal protection under the law. This led the way for equal right clauses for slaves, women, gay marriage, etc.

The significant portion, that I believe SCOTUS, specifically Judge Thomas, takes issue with is DUE PROCESS. Due process clause speaks of the process but the big argument is what “SUBSTANTIVE” or fundamental rights does the clause protect?

“Substantive due process, however, had a renaissance in the mid-twentieth century. In 1965, the Court struck down state bans on the use of contraception by married couples on the ground that it violated their “right to privacy.” Griswold v. Connecticut”

“In the wake of Griswold, the Court expanded substantive due process jurisprudence to protect a panoply of liberties, including the right of interracial couples to marry (1967), the right of unmarried individuals to use contraception (1972), the right to abortion (1973), the right to engage in intimate sexual conduct (2003), and the right of same-sex couples to marry (2015). The Court has also declined to extend substantive due process to some rights, such as the right to physician-assisted suicide (1997).“

https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/amendment-xiv/clauses/701

In his opinion, Judge Clarence, and many others before him, believe those rights should be legislated and “the court divining new rights that align with their (SCOTUS) “values” nullifies state laws and takes away the rights of the people.

You can look at his opinion beginning page 117:

file:///var/mobile/Library/SMS/Attachments/fe/14/B2A01198-944E-45B8-8DBA-B0981A9BFF37/19-1392_6j37.pdf

How do we define what a fundamental or substantive (not protected by rights 1-8) right is?

“In such legal contexts, courts determine whether rights are fundamental by examining the historical foundations of those rights and by determining whether their protection is part of a longstanding tradition”

When Roe V Wade was overturned, page 87 (ruling linked above) gives the appendix of how pregnancy laws are deeply rooted in our history. In addition historical foundation and rooted in history, we have to look at if by giving rights to one group, it infringes or denies the rights of others.

Now to circle back… with the SCOTUS rulings, the writ of certiorari was granted and vacated the previous decisions. The cases are being sent back to the court of appeals based on the SCOTUS rulings. If we look at the rulings we’ve been celebrating, the 14th amendment is consistent.

  1. for further consideration in light of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization - 14th amendment/ substantive/fundamental rights

  2. for further consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by infringing on its citizens Second Amendment right

  3. Kennedy v Bremerton school district - The Free Exercise Clause provides that “Congress shall make no law . . . prohibiting the free exercise” of religion. Amdt. 1. This Court has held the Clause applicable to the States under the terms of the Fourteenth Amendment.

1
Nolagirl99 1 point ago +1 / -0

SCOTUS saving america one ruling at a time

1
Nolagirl99 1 point ago +1 / -0

This should be highest comment. May want to make it, it’s own post

6
Nolagirl99 6 points ago +6 / -0

They turn into Tupperware. Really amazed no one has realized this yet

5
Nolagirl99 5 points ago +5 / -0

That’s how all the missing socks turn into Tupperware. This was figured out decades ago

2
Nolagirl99 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think BRICS is going to play a much bigger role and we need to be paying more attention

1
Nolagirl99 1 point ago +1 / -0

Seriously. Don’t forget that while the SC tries to control the Dems must push to expand freedom. Literally clown world

3
Nolagirl99 3 points ago +3 / -0

Q on TS changed his profile to “not the Q you want me to be” once his account was discovered. He’s a part of the tech group.

7
Nolagirl99 7 points ago +7 / -0

Great post… this will definitely help newbies understand some of our theories!

6
Nolagirl99 6 points ago +6 / -0

Not just the government. It’s all of our institutions and with each one being reveled, more wake up.

Media Politicians Pharmaceuticals Medical Immigration Medicaid/welfare Federal overreach Oil and gas Corporations Military Judicial system Educational system Foreign aid while we’re in a recession

The final blow will be Wall Street and the federal reserve. That’s where it will hurt normies the most. Economic collapse

3
Nolagirl99 3 points ago +3 / -0

We need to be collectively looking at what the attorney generals are doing in each state. They’re the ones who hold a lot of power. At the end of the day, they are the ones who can fight for their states constitutional rights that supersede the federal government. I’ve been really impressed with Louisiana’s AG

2
Nolagirl99 2 points ago +2 / -0

These are two software developers involved in launch. I follow a lot of them. My Thoughts are in comments

3
Nolagirl99 3 points ago +3 / -0

Nor me from Jamaica and someone yesterday from Mexico. Novice at posting but put my thoughts in comments

2
Nolagirl99 2 points ago +2 / -0

I just made a comment to kind of explain myself (I’m still a novice at posting) but it’s just from my own observations. I go to accounts, see who they follow and then see who they follow. So many of the accounts either retruth Q or follow Q accounts.

3
Nolagirl99 3 points ago +3 / -0

Was in day one, first week I noticed mostly verified like Catturd, people involved in launch, and anon accounts. Week 3/4 mostly informed patriots, then progressively more average R’s. I

know we’ve come to a certain understanding of not allowing accounts outside of the US to avoid bot overload. That being said, wouldn’t gov’t hackers from other countries (or our own) have found a way around this?

Another thing I don’t quite understand is why when traveling abroad, you can’t gain access? I understand fundamentally, it would be hitting off a foreign tower or whatever, but if it’s a verified US iPhone IP why would it deny access?

This is a little wild, but could TS becomes the EBS if SHTF? I mean, it wouldn’t allow foreign countries to gain access, hack, or whatever and there would be enough people on to share with normies what was happening.

I’m not techie, so I’m trying to understand some technical stuff but the fact that so many people involved in TS are either retruthing Pepe or following Pepe accounts really has me wondering?

view more: Next ›