War Room Lounge v107: Fahrenheit f54

[Quipling]

Saw this in the comments in the Billy Bloom tweet about millions. Looked it up, and it read a couple of articles about the ruling(s). Explain yourselves liberal legal gurus @Trotsky @Quipling why this shouldn't have been a sweep?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-immigrants-for-identity-theft-idUSKBN20Q26S

Without anything beyond this article, this looks like a preemption (supremacy clause) problem. Basically, states aren't supposed to jump on federal turf, like immigration. (sanctuary cities come from the flip side of that: because only feds have that power, states can't be required to help them, either). Conservatives said the ID theft law was unrelated to immigration (or it may have been preempted), liberals disagreed.

 

[Trotsky]

Saw this in the comments in the Billy Bloom tweet about millions. Looked it up, and it read a couple of articles about the ruling(s). Explain yourselves liberal legal gurus @Trotsky @Quipling why this shouldn't have been a sweep?



https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...e-immigrants-for-identity-theft-idUSKBN20Q26S

It should have been an unanimous ruling for the liberals' position, as far as I can tell. Whether it's about immigration, federal work authorizations, or social security codes, it's a federal matter. There's nothing state-related about it.

 

[Gregolian]

I need to re watch Black Lagoon. I forgot how awesomely violent it was

 

[Lord Coke]

It should have been an unanimous ruling for the liberals' position, as far as I can tell. Whether it's about immigration, federal work authorizations, or social security codes, it's a federal matter. There's nothing state-related about it.

Why and I am really asking. I didn't really look into the case at all. Preemption requires that Congress want to take exclusive control over the field.

Here it looks at first blush to me without having studied this issue at all something similar to 925c (felon in possession of a gun). Federal law makes it a crime but states can and all do have laws against it to many with stricter penalties than the federal government. That is because Congress did not expressly show an intent to have the federal government control that area.


Here the matter before the court is identity theft of a social security number. That's not really immigration and while related its attenuated and to role in the undocumented aliens favor would require either a whole host of related to immigration crimes are preempted or that idenitiry theft itself is preempted by express congressional action.

 

[MMAisGod]

Sorry I forgot you were legal too @Lord Coke

Without anything beyond this article, this looks like a preemption (supremacy clause) problem. Basically, states aren't supposed to jump on federal turf, like immigration. (sanctuary cities come from the flip side of that: because only feds have that power, states can't be required to help them, either). Conservatives said the ID theft law was unrelated to immigration (or it may have been preempted), liberals disagreed.

I mostly understand the first have of your explanation, at a fundamental level at least. I guess the end of your explanation is where I see it more. As in, the ID Theft Law is unrelated to immigration altogether isn't it? It seems like a law that can be violated in a multitude of ways. So if they commit Identity Crime X on federal docs there's no argument to be had, but then they commit the same exact Identity Crime on State Doc Y then they can be held to that, even if it was on federal doc X too. From my understanding. CNN mentions this in their article (actually this was the first one I read). Something notable in it as well was that they mention that the federal government agrees with Kansas on this case which is what raised my initial eyebrow. I would have expected them to feel the opposite or feel like their power was being slighted.

Kansas brought its appeal to the Supreme Court, arguing that even though its prosecution was based on information available on federal forms, that same information had been submitted to the state. It also argued that it was not interfering with the federal government, but instead enforcing its own identity theft regulation.

Significantly, the federal government sides with Kansas in the case, arguing in briefs that the federal law and state law at issue are not in conflict and that the lower court ignored the fact that the state prosecution could have gone forward without ever relying upon federal forms. In briefs, Solicitor General Noel Francisco said that the lower court opinion "raises federalism concerns" and "produces untenable results" by blocking a state from enforcing identity threat prosecutions.

"Kansas' prosecutions," Francisco argued, "neither invade a federally occupied field nor conflict with Congress' purposes" in passing the federal law.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/03/politics/supreme-court-immigration-garcia-kansas-decision/index.html

So I guess the main question I would be unsure of that would help is, if a crime committed relative to the state also happens in overwhelming similarity to one that happens on the federal level, does the state get swallowed by the federal typically? Or are they both usually able to enact their own punishments parallel to each other? It seems that, from my reading at least, federal laws never had to even be discussed to come to the same outcome due to the state laws that were breached.

It should have been an unanimous ruling for the liberals' position, as far as I can tell. Whether it's about immigration, federal work authorizations, or social security codes, it's a federal matter. There's nothing state-related about it.

Vanguardism Trotskyism.

 

[Lord Coke]

I need to re watch Black Lagoon. I forgot how awesomely violent it was

That is likely my favorite anime. I've always thought that under the right circumstances I could break out from the law just like Rock did from being a Japanese salaryman.

 

[Sketch]

Edit

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

Edit

I had a think for Eve...

but I was always a fan of prime Foxy Brown

 

[Sketch]

I had a think for Eve...

but I was always a fan of prime Foxy Brown

I'm glad you got to see that before the edit. As intended.

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

@luckyshot

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

@Gregolian

 

[Gregolian]

@Gregolian

Mmmmmmmmm

I need to get myself a bottle of that.

2,791.50 left on my truck to pay after dropping a large chunk of my federal return on it today on my way home.

Still have $270 in state taxes coming to me. And paid next week and I’ll throw another $500 on it like I always do every non-rent paycheck. Soon I’ll be done.

 

[senri]

Mmmmmmmmm

I need to get myself a bottle of that.

2,791.50 left on my truck to pay after dropping a large chunk of my federal return on it today on my way home.

Still have $270 in state taxes coming to me. And paid next week and I’ll throw another $500 on it like I always do every non-rent paycheck. Soon I’ll be done.

Yes how delicious. Ingest the fluids with eloquence deep inside....

 

[weed]

Yes how delicious. Ingest the fluids with eloquence deep inside....

@JOE QUEEF

 

[irish_thug]

https://forums.sherdog.com/threads/running-question.788034/

@KONG-D'SNT-TAP

This nincompoop can't even go for a light jog without getting a headache. Fuckin can

This ain't the OT pal.

 

[Sycho Sid]

Mick Mulvaney out as chief of staff. To the surprise of no one

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

This ain't the OT pal.

Can you tell me which posts of mine were deleted?

I'm legit just curious because they seem to be a few days old lol

Just got the notifications

 

[Clippy]

Can you tell me which posts of mine were deleted?

I'm legit just curious because they seem to be a few days old lol

Just got the notifications

Yes dear mods please make this a feature

I got posts deleted too but have no way to tell which ones. I need to be able to review which ones were in violation so I can learn to be a good boy

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

Yes dear mods please make this a feature

I got posts deleted too but have no way to tell which ones. I need to be able to review which ones were in violation so I can learn to be a good boy

Dear mods,

If answering my questions means you have to answer Clippys questions....don't

I'd rather have him in the dark and frustrated than know the answers to my own questions

Sincerely
Me

 

[Clippy]

Dear mods,

If answering my questions means you have to answer Clippys questions....don't

I'd rather have him in the dark and frustrated than know the answers to my own questions

Sincerely
Me

Dear mods

Don't read letters from polishheadlockguy

And money me

Money me now