[–] Christosgnosis 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
It's not as decisive after all - the Plaintiffs in this case stopped crowing about it after the Supreme Court ruling came out that backed up the dictatorial power that the governors are exerting. They thought at first their case and the ruling on it could give them some leverage, but now they believe the Supreme Court ruling has completely shut that possibility down
[–] Lawyer42 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
The article is lying to you. They lost the case and they’re just trying to spin it. Here is the actual decision. https://www.scribd.com/document/470394078/Dkt-043-20200724-Denial-1879#from_embed
[–] Psalm67 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Exactly. When I read the ruling on Scribd I saw it was exact he opposite. Of course governors can’t “enforce” in the sense of arresting people etc. the decision was FAVORABLE to the governor. It had nothing to say about restricting the government or police from enforcing these edicts. Unfortunately.
[–] corrbrick [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Thanks. I realized when I read the decision that it didn't match the article's headline.