You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
People attempting to forum slide and disrupt this board in contravention of Q's call for unity through patriotism may be banned
What is Q related? Anything involving Trump. Politics, Fake news, Censorship, Pizzagate, lluminati, New World Order, Secret Societies, Mk-Ultra, False Flags, Q proofs, etc...
Also, corruption in the following areas...
Government, Entertainment industry, celebrities, charities, corporations, etc...
No Pornographic Material Allowed
Continually harassing users can get your post/comment removed and you possibly banned. Threats of violence against other users or their family members are not allowed on v/GreatAwakening
Those belong in the comment section. If you need help, you can ping a mod, or PM us.
Posts need to be Q related. Not for attacking other users.
GAM is the new place for all things drama/mods/other users pertaining to v/GreatAwakening.
No usernames imitating mods
Misc reasons
Voat Rules
Content violates spam guidelines
Content contains or links to content that is illegal
Content contains personal information that relates to a Voat users real world or online identity
As a Washingtonian, anything that diminishes Despot inslee is a good thing. What it seems to mean to me is that the ruling says his proclamations have no legal standing, businesses can ignore his edicts, and any enforcement actions are illegitimate. The real questions are whether businesses will back off of enforcing his proclamations, and whether there will be any publicity of the courts decision, or if they will keep it buried so no one hears about it.
No, the court agreed with Inslee in that he makes the proclamations but does not directly enforce them. Other departments do that and the lawsuits regarding implementation needs to go against them. The court upheld the proclamations and denied the request to end them.
The Plaintiffs in this case thing the Supreme Court ruling that came later - backing the state edicts issued by state govts has undercut them and they are no longer touting this case as any kind of victory or advantage
The highest court in the land has give Carte Blanche to the states to make and enforce any edicts they want in the name of fighting the Wuhan virus
Evidently the court didn't see that the edicts need to be based in actual science or anything of the sort
Walmart and Home Depot have backed away from mandatory mask - evidently they have been getting communications from their customers to expect law suits because some people really do have actual disabilities that make it infeasible or dangerous to their health to wear a mask
This is the angle to use - get such people to coordinate a class action law suit against any business that attempts to push a mandatory mask policy
view the rest of the comments →
[–] Cleanhouseindc 0 points 17 points 17 points (+17|-0) ago
As a Washingtonian, anything that diminishes Despot inslee is a good thing. What it seems to mean to me is that the ruling says his proclamations have no legal standing, businesses can ignore his edicts, and any enforcement actions are illegitimate. The real questions are whether businesses will back off of enforcing his proclamations, and whether there will be any publicity of the courts decision, or if they will keep it buried so no one hears about it.
[–] Lawyer42 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
No, the court agreed with Inslee in that he makes the proclamations but does not directly enforce them. Other departments do that and the lawsuits regarding implementation needs to go against them. The court upheld the proclamations and denied the request to end them.
[–] Basballdude 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
Here's the law that gives Weisman his authority to issue the order.
https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=43.70.130
I fear that this is just a feel good story and we're still subject to the mask edict.
[–] Christosgnosis 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
The Plaintiffs in this case thing the Supreme Court ruling that came later - backing the state edicts issued by state govts has undercut them and they are no longer touting this case as any kind of victory or advantage
The highest court in the land has give Carte Blanche to the states to make and enforce any edicts they want in the name of fighting the Wuhan virus
Evidently the court didn't see that the edicts need to be based in actual science or anything of the sort
[–] Christosgnosis 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Walmart and Home Depot have backed away from mandatory mask - evidently they have been getting communications from their customers to expect law suits because some people really do have actual disabilities that make it infeasible or dangerous to their health to wear a mask
This is the angle to use - get such people to coordinate a class action law suit against any business that attempts to push a mandatory mask policy