homura1650
Have you ever worked in a place where every function/field needed a comment? Most of those comments end up being “This is the <variable name>, or this does <method name>”. Beyond, being useless, those comments are counter productive. The amount of screen space they take up (even if greyed out by the IDE) significantly hurts legability.
I’m not sure that means much either way. The zent has significant leeway to do whatever they want. Even if no underage marriage has ever happened, the Zent can still approve it, because the Zent’s word is law.
In this particular case, I think there is a strong argument that could squash any icky feelings from nobles not close to Rozemyne: “when the divine avatar of Mestionora went to meet with the gods, they altered the flow of time and matured her into an adult”.
This has the benefit of being almost entirely true. And anyone with a functioning intelligence network should be able to pick up on the implausibly fast growthspirt she underwent shortly before bestowing the G-book on the Zent.
Plus they should also be aware of the pragmatics of “well, there is not much we can do about her being an underage aub; she did conquer the duchy and repell foreign invaders. So I guess she needs a spouse to help with archducal duties. Maybe give her a few winters off of snow shoveling though”
Except in this case, it is directly relevant to the legal issue at hand. When deciding a free speach case, the first part of the analysis is if the restriction is content neutral or not.
A content neutral rule is held to the standard of intermintent scrutiny, and is frequently upheld. A content based rule is held to the standard of strict scrutiny and almost always struck drown.
If the rule against signs on the overpass were enforced uniformly, then the white supremesists would not have a legal leg to stand on. But, at least based on the article, the rule is not being enforced uniformly at all; and is only being brought up now due to the content of the speech. That puts it squarly in the realm of strict scrutiny; giving the government a very uphill battle in court.
Bribery: SNYDER v. UNITED STATES
Kavanaugh writing for the majority:
The question in this case is whether §666 also makes it a crime for state and local officials to accept gratuities—for example, gift cards, lunches, plaques, books, framed photos, or the like—that may be given as a token of appreciation after the official act. The answer is no.
The official act was a $1.1 million contract. The “token of appreciation” was a $13,000 check. At trial it was argued that the payment was for consulting services, but presumably the jury did not believe that.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-108_8n5a.pdf
Presidential immunity: TRUMP v. UNITED STATES
At least with respect to the President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute. As for his remaining official actions, he is also entitled to immunity. At the current stage of proceedings in this case, however, we need not and do not decide whether that immunity must be absolute, or instead whether a presumptive immunity is sufficient
The court takes a very broad view of core constitutional conduct
In dividing official from unofficial conduct, courts may not inquire into the President’s motives
Trump is therefore absolutely immune from prosecution for the alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department officials.
But it nevertheless contends that a jury could “consider” evidence concerning the President’s official acts “for limited and specified purposes,” and that such evidence would “be admissible to prove … " The Government’s position is untenable in light of the separation of powers principles we have outlined.
Like everyone else, the President is subject to prosecution in his unofficial capacity. But unlike anyone else, the President is a branch of government, and the Constitution vests in him sweeping powers and duties.
For vaccines, we shouldn’t even be dispensing them at cost. Vaccinations are the second most cost effective public health intervention ever, beaten only by clean drinking water.
In purely financial terms, the cost of vaccinations are lower than the average cost to the US tax payer of someone getting sick. The public service of people not getting sick is a nice bonus. As is reducing the chances of this becoming another Covid style economic catastrophe (plus, again, the public service of protecting your citizens)
Regardless of justice, this type of lawsuit isn’t in the interest of any reasonable world order.
They are suing sovereign countries for assisting in an attack on Israel. In a US federal court. With no treaties backing the suit; just a law passed unilaterally by the US.
That is not the way international law works at all. By the logic, Peru could pass a law allowing it’s citizens to sue the US because they have family that took a vacation in mexico where they were shot by a US gun.
This should be viewed in context of the US’s refusal to join the ICC, and the “Hague Invasion Act” (American Service-Members’ Protection Act) that authotizes unbounded military force against the ICC if it acts against anyone working for the US or a US ally. As well as a bill passed in the house attempting to sanction the ICC for its move against Israeli leadership.
The entire theory behind being able to have such a lawsuit in a US federal court is US imperialism.
Fetlife is not a dating app. They have actively not implemented features such as filter by age/gender in order to avoid becoming a dating app. If you are looking to get involved in your local kink community, Fetlife is the answer [0]. For anything else, it is garbage. If you try using it to get laid, you will just be pissing a bunch of people off.
[0] At least for my local kink community. Other areas might vary.