Makes a sense in a pre-industrial pre-citizenship world. The broad idea is that you establish that the people voting on things are members of the community to be impacted. That way you don’t have transient people impacting the outcomes of elections.

This was my understanding as well

College students can be eligible for SNAP & HUD.

Nope just skimmed the complaint.

I have another comment on this post which may be helpful for you. TLDR Biden’s Admin had tried to protect trans people under the ADA via executive agency. Likely outcome is that will be reversed but the ADA (and similar or related protections) & IMO will not see broader impacts. This is because the law that passed Congress and was sign by the president specifically didn’t include trans people when it was signed (along with a number of other peoples most trans people would be offended to be grouped with).

Tldr tldr: this likely stops trans people from being in the ADA’s protection.

Full complaint is case 5:24-cv-00225-C filed in the US District Court Northern District of Texas.

It seems that the heart of the lawsuit is that the Biden Admin tried to get gender dysphoria to be a disability under the Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and ADA by means of administrative rule making. The text of both of those laws as written *by Congress and signed by the Executive have clauses stating they do not encompass trans people. (Cites are in line 2 of complaint)

I’d wager the constitutional argument on the spending power is to preserve another option for appeal. Realistically I think they’ll probably win and get the Final Rule held to be a violation of the APA and struck down without the rest of Section 504 being touched. Their constitutional argument boils down to if the Final Rule isn’t violating the law the law is too vague to be enforceable.

*Edit

Re-read my comment above. They only have power which we vest in them.

deleted by creator

How can they listen to the voters if the voters never speak to them. My comment was not on the DNC or RNC but on the core of all forms of representative democracies.

Do you know the name of the member of your state’s House of Representatives that represents your district? When was the last time you spoke to your federal representative? Do he/she not answer your calls because they have to many constituents? Talk to people in your neighborhood about the need for more representatives in the house.

All sovereign power comes from the people. Read: you are that guy.

It nice to see a government address route problems like this.

Na the hardware store guys are chill

Yeah no one is fingerprinting a possession case.

Somewhere there’s an alt history timeline where Russia never sold Alaska and the USSR had possession of it during the Cold War.

I think a lot of the value in hindsight is just getting another world power off of North America.

A stateless society is one with a power vacuum. Some one will claim the title of leader and often it’ll be someone of little virtue.

You don’t have to serialize firearms you make* for your own personal use. You also don’t need to register them either*. In fact there’s restrictions on the federal government’s ability to keep a registry of guns. 18 USC 926(a)(3). From a policy perspective it’d just be creating another possession based crime that’s almost impossible to enforce. Because you could just pop a “1” on the side and claim that you sent in your registration paperwork but the government screwed up.

*True for title 1 firearms (most handguns, shotguns, and rifles) not certain other classes like those that machineguns or silencers fall into.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/how-does-person-register-firearm-or-remove-name-firearms-registration

The thing is that they’ve got teeth. E.g. redistricting, along with the plurality of powers granted to the countless offices across the nation that they hold.

Q: Should (insert political party here) disenfranchise voters for the benefit of (insert political party here)'s political ends?

A: No.

If you have no principles you have nothing.

Because most haven’t I will actually answer the call of the question. Voting is perhaps the most important way one can voice their opinion. And carries more effect than most words the average man or woman can utter.

The largest argument against these types of stances is that it will create a spoiler effect. This usually operates on the premise that a vote to a candidate is owed and not earned and or that it is impossible to achieve a different outcome besides one of the two establishment candidates. This second premise being the results of people who decry voting 3rd party as useless based on a restriction with no physical or legal basis imposed on our society by our society. There’s nothing stopping people from electing anyone else on the ballot.

If you can acknowledge that we as a society have this power the idea of accepting a lesser evil is weakened. If you vote for a lesser evil you perpetuate the broken system you hate. In your example Gaza, if someone feels that the issue is so important it merits a principled stance how can they not take the stance?

It’s a matter of pragmatism vs principles.

Never heard of beggars night. People seem to find Halloween a satisfactory name where I’ve been.