There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Theharpyeagle ,

Again, they can, but it’s less likely. It really depends on how much the genuine threat of civil unrest and violence compares against whatever benefit they get from voting a certain way (which, in perfect world, would be nothing).

Truthfully I don’t think this particular ruling was incorrect or outside the reasonable extent of their powers. Do I think the timing of it was motivated by corporate and political greed? Absolutely. It’s abundantly clear that the decision, popular among conservatives, was meant to serve as a Trump “win” based on the justices he put in place (again, disturbingly contrary to the intended purpose of the SCOTUS). It’s also a potentially dangerous decision to make without any time allotted to get critical regulations codified by congress.

That all being said, while I in no way trust in the impartiality of the current SCOTUS, I do think repealing a law without fairly universal bipartisan support is a decent bit more extreme than what they did here. I think there needs to be a balance between genuine, concerning possibilities and doom-and-gloom panic.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines