“Something [was] wrong with his eyes … scared when he looked at me,” said Vong, who recalled seeing fear in the girl’s face.
While Sablan was away, the girl – still in the car – wrote "Help Me’’ on a note and showed it to people passing by, prompting one of them to call police.
Responding officers found the girl, and she mouthed the word "help’’ to them, according to prosecutors.
Assisted suicide should be legal, at least for incurable, painful disease (and many other things if you ask me). This poor man should not been made to kill his wife personally to save her from suffering. That is cruel to both him and his wife, who could have gone in a much more peaceful way.
A million dollars is hardly enough. The lawsuit should be for the dollar amount of his lifetime worth of gainful employment. Anything less is despicable and wrong.
and then times it by 10. If it bankrupts the company so be it.
I work in construction. We have a re-roof job running right now. They go through almost a pallet of water every day and are required to have x amount of rest in shade. When it got to hot the hours were moved to night till mid day to protect them from the heat.
If they suspected him of being on drugs they should have pulled him from the job site immediately once symptoms were showing. Anything less is a danger to the employee as well as everyone else on the site.
What this company did was illegal, morally wrong and down right evil.
The thing is, there’s nothing to find out. The SC (compromised as it is) says “no, you can’t do that”. The state government is saying “cool bro imma do it anyways”. If the feds impose a new map, what happens if the state just ignores it outright? Or any other measures intended to enforce this decision?
The funniest part of it is that this 100% has the potential to set up some sort of precedent for when the shoe is on the other foot. Like, if the Supreme Court orders CA to do something extremely shitty or anti-democratic, what happens if Newsom (or whoever is governor at that point) and the CA legislature just says “make me”?
Economically, California is (at least was, I don’t know if it still is) capable of sustaining itself separated from federal money. It even has the power to set national standards, like the “known to cause cancer” warning. Which may seem like it’s slapped on everything, but from what I remember, its slapped on everything containing any carcinogens, covering products even after their lifespan into disposal (if you burn a product but it doesn’t destroy the carcinogen it’s still a risk since it’s airborne or in waste.)
Alabama is just completely fucked if they get cutoff from federal money.
I did a road trip from Los Angeles to Florida about a decade ago to help my college roommate move for med school. I recall seeing multiple billboards driving through gulf coast states saying things like
State funding: 10M
Federal funding: 65M
And some of the states didn’t even have the “state funding” part.
I really would enjoy seeing these states find out what happens when you fuck around with the people who are buttering your bread.
You're right, there's not much the federal government can do to force this directly, but indirectly, they can decide where federal funding goes. and Alabama gets 41.2% of it's state revenue from federal funding.
Which is why I actually find this low-key hilarious, because if this is somehow left to stand, it implies that states who are net providers (I.e. most blue states) can simply ignore the SC.
Well, there are options aside from sending in troops. The article notes that there can still be challenges to these maps, and one outcome is that the court throws out the legislatures maps entirely and hires a special master.
Maybe they should hire the one they used in NY. He was so effective at making competitive districts and avoiding gerrymandering that the Democrats lost 4 House seats there, making up most of the Republican Majority this Congress. If your goal is to level the playing field, he’s your man.
Refer this to that DOJ and get back to doing your jobs. So sick of this theatrical “they’re all the same” BS.
People, pay no attention to “allegations” of wrongdoing. If you just keep score based upon convictions and plea bargains, it is clear which team is committing 90% of the crimes.
Fuck them. Require a licensed doctor on site observing the workers. Fuck this I think your on drugs bullshit. Why the actual fuck would Texas take away water breaks? How much more value is that aqueezing out of your workers. I think this lady deserves WAY more than a million. You kill an employee due to neglect, pay a billion. But that’s too high. It’s supposed to be a punishment. Fuck it. A billion a year forever.
They’re taking away the workers’rights to get water breaks, not the supervisors’ rights to give them. So, if you’re a happy and compliant little drone who kisses enough ass maybe you’ll get one, and making workers’ feel the need to do things like that is where the real value in this lies for the bosses I think.
Those 5 minutes you’re drinking water COULD be spent making money for the company! Think of the bottom line! /s
That’s literally what this is. I’m sure whoever proposed the bill had a friend who runs a construction or landscaping company complaining that their workers are taking too much time on break because they’re hot.
The power dynamic is already heavily skewed in favor of the employer. Especially with construction and landscaping work, the way it tends to go is: workers need the job. The company rules with a pretty strict hand. You don’t like something, there’s the door. So you put up with stuff until you find another job or can’t take it anymore.
Take away a legal right, and that’s that. The workers and the company both know who has the upper hand. Sure, one person could try to stick up for themselves here and there, but plenty of people don’t because they’re afraid to lose their job. And it usually doesn’t change anything anyway. Even when there are laws to protect employees, companies don’t always follow them.
I’m talking mostly about non-union jobs there. Union jobs are better, but they’re not free of problems either.
And don’t forget in those industries you see a lot of workers who may not be legal so they have to put up with the companies bullshit. It’s not like they can get the law involved even if they wanted to. Companies know this and abuse their workforce heavily because of it.
A lot of people were wondering this during the later Trump years: what’s to stop government officials from simply ignoring the Supreme Court (or another branch, for that matter). It’s surely a “Constitutional Crisis”, but many conservatives seem more interested in preaching about the Constitution than actually following it.
what’s to stop government officials from simply ignoring the Supreme Court
A federal government being willing to enforce the law Reconstruction style and send in federal troops to effect the arrest of these traitors and the unconditional surrender of their government. Anything less is just giving the anti-democratic forces time to get stronger and chip away at more of our society.
A federal government being willing to enforce the law Reconstruction style and send in federal troops to effect the arrest of these traitors and the unconditional surrender of their government. Anything less is just giving the anti-democratic forces time to get stronger and chip away at more of our society.
At first I was writing a comment to say the Posse Comitatus Act wouldn't allow this, but it seems like the Insurrection Act of 1807 is an exception, and would apply in this instance.
The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it—
(1)so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or
(2)opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.
In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.
Edit: I feel compelled to point out that we're not here yet, because the SCOTUS order has a review process for the new voting maps, and if a judge rejects them, the judge can authorize a third party to draw the maps for Alabama. If the Alabama government rejects those third-party maps, then shit gets real.
It won’t get that real. Ohio’s GOP has been ordered by our state Supreme Court since before 2016 to redraw fair voting maps and not only did they not, but they submitted blatantly unfair maps that didn’t even come close to their guidelines. The Court has done nothing and will continue to do nothing.
We are most certainly within a constitutional crisis. You can probably start the timeline at the 2000 Supreme Court ruling where the court said it had no authority to rule, but it did. The republicans blocking the supreme court nomination was also a clear breakdown of the system.
news
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.