Isn't that what a form is?

There's no reason a state can't make that decision. You didn't even make an argument. Just made a statement.

Ideally you'd just challenge a ruling like that and have it thrown out for being meritless and the judge who made it sanctioned. But the supreme court has ruled that judges have absolute immunity for their actions no matter how corrupt, so the best you can do is vote them out of office and then do nothing to them like we're doing here.

The justice system is more concerned with protecting itself than justice and it's the supreme court that's been heading that boat for the last 200 years.

Still that doesn't make their argument not stupid as hell. They have chances to fix it here and just refuse to admit that there's a problem.

But what are the chances that one person hangs out with three people who have similar opinions? Sounds impossible if you ask me.

The vast vast vast vast majority of men in the world are uncut and fine.

I think they're (fox) probably sending a message to him here that he better do what they want.

I remember hearing google crediting every interview as 2-3 hours time per interviewer once to account for prep, scorecard filling, and discussions. They lost two days work on you for nothing.

You can add it back in taskbar settings if you use it (and remove the copilot button if you hate it).

iMessage is the same though... It only falls back to sms when required (like everything else) and people hate it when it does.

The problem with a lot of originalist shit is that the people talking about it just selectively apply it where they want. The supreme court will happily apply common law right up until you point out judges in it being tried for corruption. Then suddenly their wars turn off and judicial immunity has just existed forever.

I thought this was disallowed by the app store.

No one created those though. The supreme court just made them up. It's the same thing you've been seeing in these recent discounted trans lawsuits. Despite the constitution explicitly being amended to allow it, the supreme court literally has said "oh, you cant sue states for civil rights violations. You've just got no recourse there. Good luck!"