Alright. What is starlink’s legal path to overturn the decision? Whether the decision makes sense or not doesn’t change what the decision was.
Alright. What is starlink’s legal path to overturn the decision? Whether the decision makes sense or not doesn’t change what the decision was.
They can think it violates the Brazilian constitution all they like, my understanding is that the supreme court already weighed in on the issue and that’s the only opinion that matters in most countries.
I’m struggling to imagine what the use case would even be.
I think the incel crowd generally want to strip women of their rights because they see women’s liberty as a main reason they can’t get laid.
So, I’d imagine the childless cat women thing could hit with them because they’d be like “yeah, women should stop being so up-tight and have my babies!”
Or something like that.
Yeah that occurred to me after I posted my comment. Seems perfect to me, too.
For SCOTUS I think the idea is to have an opening every 2 years. I can see the argument in favor of replacing them at about that rate. But maybe 1 per year is better. Regardless, I’d like to see the SCOTUS openings be more predictable and frequent.
Even if that’s true, being able to navigate the media environment is a job requirement for politicians.
He sucks so bad at this.
Maybe we shouldn’t screen out intelligent people from law enforcement.
Innocent bystanders? I guess there were some journalists there.
Vote Republican again, I’m sure they’ll fix it!
My family is pretty politically aware and my brother only just started talking about it, so it will take a bit for word to spread.
I’ve literally never heard Gen Z described as tech savvy.