While Justice Kavanaugh’s majority opinion only runs 17 pages, Justice Alito’s dissent clocks in at 28 pages. He opens with his sharp disagreement with the majority, noting:

The Court holds Texas lacks standing to challenge a federal policy that inflicts substantial harm on the State and its residents by releasing illegal aliens with criminal convictions for serious crimes. In order to reach this conclusion, the Court brushes aside a major precedent that directly controls the standing question, refuses to apply our established test for standing, disregards factual findings made by the District Court after a trial, and holds that the only limit on the power of a President to disobey a law like the important provision at issue is Congress’s power to employ the weapons of inter-branch warfare—withholding funds, impeachment and removal, etc. I would not blaze this unfortunate trail. I would simply apply settled law, which leads ineluctably to the conclusion that Texas has standing. //

Alito concludes by cautioning against the continued expansion of executive power and chiding the majority for shirking its duty:

This sweeping Executive Power endorsed by today’s decision may at first be warmly received by champions of a strong Presidential power, but if Presidents can expand their powers as far as they can manage in a test of strength with Congress, presumably Congress can cut executive power as much as it can manage by wielding the formidable weapons at its disposal. That is not what the Constitution envisions.

I end with one final observation. The majority suggests that its decision rebuffs an effort to convince us to “‘usurp’” the authority of the other branches, but that is not true. Ante, at 3. We exercise the power conferred by Article III of the Constitution, and we must be vigilant not to exceed the limits of our constitutional role. But when we have jurisdiction, we have a “virtually unflagging obligation” to exercise that authority. Colorado River Water Conservation Dist. v. United States, 424 U. S. 800, 817 (1976). Because the majority shuns that duty, I must respectfully dissent.

olexander scherba🇺🇦 @olex_scherba
·
Memorial plaques on a school in russia. His dad died 21-year-old in Chechnya in 2001. He died 21-year-old in Ukraine and left no son.
All for the sake of the garbage in putin's head.

#PutinIsaWarCriminal #StandWithUkraine
9:08 AM · Jun 16, 2023

Between the war and emigration to avoid transcription, Russia may have lost most of a generation of young men. //

Chuck Pfarrer | Indications & Warnings | @ChuckPfarrer
·
PUTIN'S MISTAKE: RU’s demolition of the Kakhovka Dam was not only inhumane, but stupid. @bayraktar_1love posts this video of the’ desertification' of the Kakhovka reservoir. By August, this bottom land will be baked hard and UKR will use it to cross the Dnipro & flank Melitopol. //

Aphex 320D Compellor Stereo Audio Level Controller – Used

$595.00

$5/Mo Red Pocket Prepaid Wireless Phone Plan+Kit: 100 Talk 100 Text 500MB
360 Day eBay Exclusive Plan

$5.00/mo Paid annually $60.00

500 Minutes, 500 Texts, & 500MB

Free International Calling & Texting

WiFi Calling on compatible phones

To find the best prepaid plans, we look for low-cost plans that offer enough data to meet the needs of a typical smartphone user. During our research into the best cell phone plans overall, we take note of the best prepaid options from carriers big and small.

We're not just considering price, though. We look at the network a prepaid service uses. (AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon obviously use their own networks for prepaid coverage, but mobile virtual network operators — or MVNOs — like Mint, Tello and Visible use other carriers' networks.) We note when a prepaid carrier might slow down your service and what happens to your coverage when you use up all your data.

No contract cell phone plans & prices
Compare no contract phone plans & prices:

5GB 5G/4G DATA - JUST $5/MO
New Customer Deal - First Three Months Only

• Unlimited Talk & Text

• $15 for First 3 Months (66% Savings)

• FREE 2-Day Shipping ($9.99 value)

Get unlimited data, talk, text, and hotspot with Visible. Taxes and fees included.

$45/mo or $25/mo

• In this example we upgrade XigmaNAS to version XigmaNAS-x64-embedded-11.2.0.4.5748.img.xz.

Do they get that since they live in Michigan, if they didn’t have fossil fuels, they would probably freeze to death? //

surfcat50
5 hours ago
Their sentences should include prohibition on using products with fossil fuels.

KanekoaTheGreat
@KanekoaTheGreat
·
Follow
“Biden strong-arms Burisma into hiring his druggie son and next month Hunter opens up an offshore account in Malta with a bank that’s so dirty, it got shut down for money laundering.”

@JesseBWatters

8:45 PM · Jun 19, 2023 //

Sen. Ron Johnson reacted to the news this way.

‘No one should find this latest revelation surprising,’ he told DailyMail.com.

‘The Bidens knew exactly the type of people they needed to deal with – alleged money launderers like Patrick Ho, Mykola Zlochevsky, and now, allegedly, Mr. Pillow. The question now is what did the FBI know, when did they know it, and what did they do about it?’

In the early 1960s Soviet Union sold titanium to the US believing they needed it for Pizza Ovens but instead they used it to build the iconic SR-71 Blackbird Mach 3+ spy plane

After all, they fraudulently possibly told their comrades that the United States was a lazy country that probably couldn’t even cook for itself. //

Titanium procurement during the Cold War was so vital to the US’ goal of defeating the Soviet Union that it had to secretly buy the metal from the very country it sought to vanquish. It was 1960 and Washington needed spy planes that could avoid detection in Soviet airspace by flying to the heavens. To make what would become the vaunted SR-71 Blackbird, Lockheed knew it had to build a light plane, but one that was strong enough to hold extra fuel to give it expansive range. The only metal that would do the job was titanium. The only place to get titanium in the needed quantities was the Soviet Union.

The US worked through Third World countries and fake companies and finally was able to ship the ore to the US to build the SR-71. //

“The airplane is 92% titanium inside and out. Back when they were building the airplane the United States didn’t have the ore supplies – an ore called rutile ore. It’s a very sandy soil and it’s only found in very few parts of the world. The major supplier of the ore was the USSR. Working through Third World countries and bogus operations, they were able to get the rutile ore shipped to the United States to build the SR-71,” famous former SR-71 pilot Colonel Rich Graham said in an interesting article appeared on BBC.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20130701-tales-from-the-blackbird-cockpit

"We already know from early research that it is possible."

Eight years after Google Domains launched, and a little more than a year after it graduated out of beta, Google is "winding down following a transition period," as part of "efforts to sharpen our focus." That's corporate-ese for "We need to keep cost-cutting, so we're selling this business we just finished shaping up to Squarespace." //

However clean and orderly a transition the two companies try to emulate, the sale cannot help but further Google's image as a company that readily gives up on projects that aren't core to its advertising business, even those that have matured and would seem to encourage a tie-in with Google accounts. //

Goofball_Jones Ars Praefectus
13y
3,532
So, looking back at the Google Graveyard, it seems their ongoing philosophy is "if we can't totally dominate a market with a service, we'll kill the service". I mean, look what is left is just the major things they totally dominate. YouTube, Search, Email, and to some extent, Android. That's why it's a laugh-fest when they announce something new because we all know if they don't dominate the world with it within a year, they'll kill it off.

I picture in the future some service they come up with that will keep you alive well past the usual age of dying....only to kill it off a few years later, telling the people currently on it "you have 30 days to take care of your affairs and say goodbye to your family and friends. Thank you for supporting GoogleLife" //

cdd Smack-Fu Master, in training
2d
1
The $180 million Google gets from the sale doesn't even come close to covering the $226 million they paid Sundar Pichai in 2022 and only serves to erode consumer trust in Google's willingness to continue any of its products. If they need the money, why not just hire a cheaper CEO?

What did that shameless, dishonest groveling at the feet of the Chinese dictatorship accomplish? The answer is apparently nothing. When Secretary of State Antony Blinken arrived in the adversarial nation on Sunday to hold more fruitless talks, the CCP immediately set out to embarrass the Biden administration.

Is this how this entire trip is going to go?

DaiWW @BeijingDai
·
Blinken lands in China. No red carpet, no greeting party and no high level CPC officals.
9:19 PM · Jun 17, 2023 //

When high-ranking diplomats (and there is no higher ranking than Blinken) visit other countries, it is an act of tradition and respect to roll out the red carpet. It’s also customary for that person’s foreign counterpart, usually the one he’ll be negotiating with, to be in attendance to greet said diplomat and escort them to the meeting place or where they are staying. In this case, Blinken was met with a low-ranking official while given essentially zero pomp and circumstance, and the reason China snubbed him isn’t exactly a mystery.

As it stands, the CCP sees Biden as weak and ineffective. Not surprisingly, that’s because the president is weak and ineffective. His prostration before Xi Jinping on Saturday, defending China’s aggression with talking points that came straight out of Beijing (and that his own administration officials have contradicted), has only made the situation worse.

Unfortunately, sad stories like this will continue to emerge as long as these outrages are allowed to continue. Kids should not be used as surgical guinea pigs and weapons in this bizarre and ghoulish culture war we’ve found ourselves in. One can only hope these doctors and the Kaiser Hospitals are forced to pay hand over fist.

Unfortunately, Bouldin is one of many individuals who have been targeted driving through Seward County. In fact, the county has raked in $7.5 million over the past five years: //

Officers typically take their ill-gotten gains by pressuring motorists to sign a form indicating that the civilian is willingly giving up their money or property to law enforcement. They do so under the threat of being taken to prison and charged with felonies. In essence, the officer offers to let them go in exchange for taking the money they confiscate as payment.

Does this not sound like a government official requesting a bribe? //

The Original John Doe
12 hours ago edited
"For those unaware, civil asset forfeiture is a legal process..."

Civil forfeiture was ruled legal by SCOTUS in the 1840's in HARMONY v. UNITED STATES. In that case Justice Joseph Story wrote:

"vessel which commits the aggression is treated as the offender, as the guilty instrument or thing to which the forfeiture attaches, without any reference whatsoever to the character or conduct of the owner. [The seizure of the ship is justified by] the necessity of the case, as the only adequate means of suppressing the offense or wrong, or insuring an indemnity to the injured party."

Civil forfeiture was supposed to be used only in those cases where getting hold of the person was impossible. The federal and state governments have been abusing it ever since.

In 2017, Justice Clarence Thomas denied certiorari (refused to hear the case) in LEONARD v. TEXAS on technical grounds but he wrote at the end of his opinion the following:

"Whether this Court’s treatment of the broad modern forfeiture practice can be justified by the narrow historical one is certainly worthy of consideration in greater detail."

Then on on April 17, 2023 the court agreed to review "CULLEY v. MARSHALL" which is a civil asset forfeiture case against the state Alabama who seized a car because the driver was in possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia. However the car did not even belong to the driver. It belonged to his mother.

Maybe the new conservative SCOTUS will finally put some limits on civil asset forfeiture. //

It was another one of those laws that supposedly had only the best of intentions, ignoring that it is always those with bad intentions who will always find a way to twist and abuse it.

And that is why less gov't is best gov't.

Megan Basham @megbasham
·
Unequivocal statement on disfellowshipping Saddleback from the Southern Baptist Convention. Good sign it may be possible to stop drift when messengers are informed and understand what’s happening. That’s where the work ahead lies—education.
11:11 AM · Jun 14, 2023 //

I think the SBC is right in principle, and I think the action by the SBC leadership was courageous. I have to believe that Rick Warren, author of arguably the best-selling book of all time not called “The Bible,” thought that his congregation was too big to be “disfellowshipped” and could do as it damned well pleased. The fact that he was proven wrong is a triumph for first principles. //

The key takeaway is that Jesus Christ had women in his inner circle, and they were critical to the Church’s work. He did not designate any of them as apostles or send them out to preach and convert because He chose not to. The argument that He didn’t because of the culture of the time is an argument that human customs limit God’s power. It is not a question of oppressing or undervaluing women because the same guy who says no to women pastors disagrees (Galatians 3:28). It isn’t saying that women are inferior to men in devotion because, on Calvary, Jesus was comforted by one man (St. John the Evangelist) and several women (see Matthew 27:55–56, Luke 23:49, Mark 15:40, and John 19:25). It is because Churches built upon Scripture cannot arrogate to themselves the rights retained by God. //

Will this cause harm to the SBC? I think that is doubtful. In times of repression, homogenous communities survive. Some churches will disaffiliate, but the SBC will be stronger. Besides that, religion is not a popularity contest. A smaller, hotter Church does more of God’s work than an enormous lukewarm one.

The real question is, why do people join organizations to create conflict and try to change the larger organization to accommodate them? Warren’s Saddleback Church has been part of the SBC since its founding in 1980. He knew what the Baptist Faith & Message laid out as a baseline for affiliation and basically dared the SBC to do anything when he ordained three women. Why didn’t he just announce that Saddleback was moving on and leaving the SBC? That would have been honorable and non-controversial. It is hard to say his decision to try to bully the SBC into changing its rules to accommodate him was principled. //

Consumer of toast
3 hours ago edited
When it comes to principled beliefs in faith, I think that that is something that should not waiver. Right now the Christian church in America is in decline. I'm sure there are lots of Christians who eat meat. PETA will call you evil, sick and disgusting for what you do, yet you ignore them and continue to enjoy your hamburgers. Yet, someone from the LGBTIA+ calls you a bigot, you alter your beliefs to try to be considerate of them in hopes that they stop calling you names. I find it pathetic. You stand more firmly in your belief of chicken nuggets than you do in your faith in God. Stand firm in your belief and faith in Jesus Christ. //

etba_ss
2 hours ago
It is because Churches built upon Scripture cannot arrogate to themselves the rights retained by God.
That right there sums it all up. It simply isn't our decision to make. You either believe Scripture and follow it or you don't. The moment you start cutting and pasting, you are creating your own religion with yourself as a co-ruler with God, which will rapidly descend into just you being your own god. //

etba_ss smagar
2 hours ago
Better to be irrelevant and faithful to Scripture than popular and unfaithful.

That's what Scripture says. Your debate is not with the SBC, it is with God, the divine author of Scripture.

Plenty of people reject parts of God's Word they don't like. Jesus himself told people things they didn't like and didn't want to accept. Why should we think that we should have a message everyone loves in their own sinful nature? Speak the truth in love and let the Holy Spirit do the convicting.

As I said above, the biggest issue isn't women pastors but the willingness of Saddleback and Warren to reject Scripture to fit in with modern culture. That is a slippery slope and it gets worse from there. If someone has had women pastors for 200 years, while still wrong, it doesn't open the door to rejecting Scripture for modern acceptance the way this would.