No laws have been changed. Court decisions are not considered the passage of a law, so ex post facto doesn't apply. Changes to how laws are interpreted don't factor into ex post facto considerations.
ignirtoq
joined 8 months ago
Ex post facto is for if a new law is passed making something a crime, and the act was committed before its passage. This is all about interpretation of already passed law. It's basically the justices saying that this was against the law the whole time. Ex post facto doesn't apply here.
Ironically if he did that and appointed new liberal justices, there's a good chance the new Court would overturn this Court's decision, and he could be convicted of murder and probably violating several other federal laws for that act.
Jack Black canceled his tour after Kyle Gass made a joke about the Trump assassination attempt.
Yes, I got a paywall.
No, we're in this position because of a failure of leadership. Leaders can unite people behind doing things they don't want to do. It's how rationing was tolerated for years in WWII. But we have an entire political party built around telling people what they want to hear while working against their interests for the wealthy's short term gains. We could have conquered this from the top-down with a good plan and charismatic leaders supporting it.
People need to start changing their behavior about this heat. I know this sounds like victim blaming. I know people shouldn't have to change their behavior because we saw global warning coming for 30 years and should have prevented this from happening. But it's happening. You can't go into Death Valley in the summer anymore. You just can't. Please don't put yourself in this position.
It's a tragedy that this death happened. We absolutely need to adapt our emergency services to this heat to try to prevent something like this from happening again. But we also need to change our behaviors so we don't end up in that position in the first place.
Your comment is technically accurate, but leaves out context and relevant information, which makes it misleading. My comment is accurate as well.
The $80 billion is spread over 10 years, and Republicans have already reduced that by $20 billion. Also, that's the total increase in funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, whereas this $1 billion recovered is only one success story of many. Please don't make such misleading statements.
~~What toppings are those? I'm looking from a phone, so I could be way off, but it looks like red bell pepper, pickle slices, and over-easy fried eggs~~ Don't know how I missed the toppings in your description. Looks very tasty!
Language is magic for these people, specifically the right grouping of words is supposed to be an incantation to get them out of social responsibility, and the wrong collection of words is what binds them.
Since the state regulates "driving" of vehicles, no sovcit drives. They all "move" vehicles or "transport" vehicles.
It's ridiculous, because law revolves around actions independent of how anyone in specific describes those actions, but that's the mindset of these people. Viewing their beliefs as a kind of word Tetris has at least helped me wrap my head around what could possibly give them some of their strange notions of law.