> There is no reason to believe he was innocent of those charges.

Except that whole "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" thing our entire justice system is intended to be built on.

It's possible this is what happened, but we do not know that for sure. This is what the prosecutor alleges.

>All 13 charges against Hobbs have been dropped. In dropping the charges, a local prosecutor said that there is insufficient evidence that Hobbs committed assault, battery and obstruction at the jail and that the state isn’t prosecuting Hobbs’ drug and traffic charges in the interest of justice.

I'm not in the habit of taking a prosecutor's claims that the person they were originally planning on prosecuting was totally guilty as gospel truth.

Seems like a major fucking issue with police being so violent it prevents the people from getting the trial and justice they deserve if this man was intoxicated (or trafficking, they don't specify the drug charges) while driving.

I've seen gasses combine to create solids, inedible clothing turned into juice and hard metal pulled from liquid medicine.

All of these are essentially magic to me, even after the time I've put into learning chemistry and understanding the changes occurring. If inter-dimensional travel was announced tomorrow I would be fascinated, but there's no reason to think it's impossible. We just haven't figured out how to do it yet.

It's how they refer to the Office of Inspector General instead of repeating themselves.

>In the fall, an inspector general report accused Blanton of abuse of government property and wasting taxpayer dollars by allowing his family to drive a government-owned vehicle and taking the vehicle on out-of-town trips to South Carolina and Florida, according to the report. The federal watchdog also accused Blanton, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, of ethics violations over an offer to provide tours to “patriots” weeks before the November 2020 election.

On top of providing clarity in the sense that it somewhat explains what the inspector general does, restating like this can help keep readers from becoming disengaged due to repetitious writing. The issue here is that the headline buries the lede and tries to drum up minor controversy.

> I'm in the camp that we shouldn't let foreigners buy property here. but capitalism.

I'm actually pretty fine with foreign ownership of property, with the caveat that there should be a hard cap on residential properties and a massive idle land tax on unused property.

That's pretty ironic considering literally everybody's success is built on "bought, borrowed, or stolen technology".

The murders will continue until morale improves

^^Or ^^Khomeini's ^^head ^^is ^^put ^^on ^^a ^^pike

Several organizations quoted within this article are European or Ukrainian organizations. You can't just say "russia" and close your eyes to bad shit that happens, even if it is one of our allies doing it.

This law is needlessly broad and empowers the Ukrainian state to engage in prior restraint.

His argument is framed from a textualist POV. Looking at the constitution, and law in general, from that framing is troubling for a constructivist such as myself. Not as bad as originalism, but it is still troubling that KBJ signed onto it, and IMO is a message that she will avoid rocking the boat.

I ultimately agree with Gorsuch, don't get me wrong. However, I dislike the avenues he took to arrive at our shared conclusion.

>“The current border crisis is not a COVID crisis,” Gorsuch wrote. “And courts should not be in the business of perpetuating administrative edicts designed for one emergency only because elected officials have failed to address a different emergency. We are a court of law, not policymakers of last resort.”

Ketanji Brown Jackson, in one of her first decisions as a SCOTUS Justice, signed onto Gorsuch's objection. The other two non-far right Justices, Sotomayor and Kagan, opposed without comment.

This is interesting from KBJ, IMO. I personally am a strong supporter of the Living Constitution theory, but her signing onto Gorsuch's dissent here makes it appear as if she is less firm on it than I would like.

Naturally the standard chorus of chucklefucks has no reasoning behind their motion. Of the 3 page decision, 2 pages are comprised of Gorsuch explaining exactly why this is a bullshit order, then accusing the chucklefucks of legislating from the bench.

The states do not have standing to compel the federal government to argue harder in court (whatever the fuck they think the feds could say to make keeping an emergency order permanently is another story), nor is there a reasonable argument that the Circuit Court does not have the authority to rule such orders unconstitutional.

This stay is a gift to Republicans, and an embarrassment for the court.

Most people turn a bit red and get the hint, but some will get violently angry that you dared invade their privacy by hearing their loud ass conversation right next to you.