2
72

[–] Disaronnoonthecocks 2 points 72 points (+74|-2) ago 

"No trump no kkk no facist usa" - repeated 10000 times. Good ol' debate.

0
3

[–] mamwad 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

I'm going to hijack the top comment since I'm late, and no one actually seemed to put in the effort to spend 5 minutes searching for the rulings.

Obama's executive order made it so all public education institutions would have to allow transgender people to use the bathroom of their choice. All educational institutions receiving federal funds are subject to federal regulation under Title IX, which requires schools to be gender-inclusive.

Trump's order tries to coerce sanctuary cities to help enforce federal law. The case law used to strike it down was written by former-Justice Scalia of all people. It's a state's rights issue. There is no law that says that states must allocate resources to enforce federal law. And, as someone who supports marijuana legalization, I say that that is a good thing.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
2

[–] superAIDS 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Not to mention that if you gathered every klan member in the country you would maybe fill a high school football stadium. They're not exactly what you'd call a "credible threat."

2
1

[–] GoatyMcGoatface 2 points 1 points (+3|-2) ago 

What we need is more worthless niggers that stay on their phone at work, then blame you when the job isn't completed on time. I thought it was bad when they stuck me with a Mexican who didn't speak English, but even he was more helpful than the black.

29
-27

3
37

[–] Joker68 3 points 37 points (+40|-3) ago 

Muh Russians! Muh Tax returns! REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

1
1

[–] crunt 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

Keith Olberman's sweaty brow will save us

1
0

[–] kjell 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

Is he still that podcast from his mom's basement?

2
25

[–] TheDude2 2 points 25 points (+27|-2) ago  (edited ago)

Looked at this briefly. CNN said it may not have been legal, yet shareblue said it is totally legit. But both of those places spew shit.

Obama tried to say it was a violation of the civil rights act. Trump says the sanctuary cities are violating the law. So it is the same exact argument.

4
37

[–] 8Hz_WAN_IP 4 points 37 points (+41|-4) ago 

Not at all, one was posed by Obama the other by Trump. See the difference now?

0
29

[–] Poot_McGarvey 0 points 29 points (+29|-0) ago  (edited ago)

(I am not a Liberal)

The actual answer has to do with the specificity regarding the funds that are to be withheld, the specificity of the proscribed action, and the closeness in relationship between the funds and the proscribed action. You have to have the funds in question be narrowly related to the activity you are proscribing to the states. Sooo. The Judge who made the ruling would likely distinguish the case something like the following:

  • Obamas funds (something like federal high school grants ) are related to the proscribed action (transgender bathrooms in public schools or whatever) = relatively narrow amount of funds, relatively small proscribed action, High school funds related to high school bathrooms
  • Trumps order, written more generally, potentially put more funds in question...... to the proscribed actions of "enforcing immigration law"...The funds aren't as specifically tied to the proscribed action. And enforcing immigration law, which can encompass many different things, is a larger and less specific demand on the states.

Not saying I think this is how it should be. But its more complicated that y'all are making it out to be. I think Trump could get this done with a better and more specifically written order.

0
1

[–] wallstreets 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Well one is also to enforce unambiguous federal laws and the other requires a bit of twisting original wording /intent of original law to fit what an administration wants

7
13

[–] Whitemail 7 points 13 points (+20|-7) ago  (edited ago)

Civil rights = the Jewish communist plot to destroy America

It's working, especially, since it was coupled with the bill that opened the doors to third world garbage.

1
11

[–] amendthediscourse 1 points 11 points (+12|-1) ago 

You: blame Jews for everything Feminists: Blame men for everything Black people: Blame white people for everything You: Mock feminists and black people for blaming other groups of people for everything

1
2

[–] Ywis 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

Nah bra nah

0
24

[–] jackofdiamonds 0 points 24 points (+24|-0) ago 

How can the federal government withhold funds for road maintenance from any state that doesn't set the drinking age to 21? This shit has been going on for decades. There is plenty of precedent for federal social engineering through funding.

0
3

[–] go1dfish 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

And that bullshit needs to stop.

Ideally they would stop stealing from us to begin with, but if they are going to do it it should be as a means of funding government, not social control.

0
3

[–] cointelpro_shill 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

wut man. that's like some european shit

0
6

[–] wylan 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

It has been that way since the federal gov't set their drinking age to 21, which was before I was born. They did the same thing when the speed limit was set to 55.

0
12

[–] SolarBaby 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

That which furthers the NWO agenda is allowed, that which does not is prohibited.

4
12

[–] hotairmakespopcorn 4 points 12 points (+16|-4) ago 

Ignorance. Hatred of law and order. Hatred of the US Constitution. Corruption. That's how. Liberalism is a mental illness.

0
0

[–] Freakazoid 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

This isn't your everyday average stupid...this is advanced stupid.

11
-7

0
7

[–] somethingissmarmy 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Because "feelings" not "laws".

[–] [deleted] 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
5

[–] Tendie_Sanders 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

HE WAS KANGZ AND SHEEIT

load more comments ▼ (31 remaining)