Jackie Gardina on Nostr: npub170vth…wjavf As I said in an earlier post we may need to agree to disagree. A ...
npub170vth99f30mk0s683wkxkhdhraxkmnyc5a8nw9p2046jz8ztdnps3wjavf (npub170v…javf) As I said in an earlier post we may need to agree to disagree. A state makes a law that is clearly unconstitutional at the time it is passed. There is no question it was. Roe was in effect. The Supreme Court decides to allow the law to go into effect instead of maintaining the status quo—which would be to stay the implementation of the law until a decision on the merits was made. It did the opposite, contrary to its standard for granting emergency petitions.
Published at
2023-08-25 13:20:15Event JSON
{
"id": "1a14e44d78a251becf83b3e15da9fa43681221d735e26ab1f6410e63457c3571",
"pubkey": "dd68eff50891b20da793b02958cbe12c4b0865dda72acd63b870828f5e5ebdcb",
"created_at": 1692969615,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"f3d8bb94a98bf767c3478bac6b5db71f4d6dcc98a74f37142a7d75211c4b6cc3",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"p",
"11662a3e7c3d4b359f9872c6f843b5090561e62f16b62715a1cee49053b3b103",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub"
],
[
"e",
"35010a6348e3aed3eb8781473a111e6431ff91ec1d19ab2708f9d8a1e7e90574",
"wss://relay.mostr.pub",
"reply"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://awscommunity.social/users/jackiegardina/statuses/110950456726301362",
"activitypub"
]
],
"content": "nostr:npub170vth99f30mk0s683wkxkhdhraxkmnyc5a8nw9p2046jz8ztdnps3wjavf As I said in an earlier post we may need to agree to disagree. A state makes a law that is clearly unconstitutional at the time it is passed. There is no question it was. Roe was in effect. The Supreme Court decides to allow the law to go into effect instead of maintaining the status quo—which would be to stay the implementation of the law until a decision on the merits was made. It did the opposite, contrary to its standard for granting emergency petitions.",
"sig": "b0216d97a5164e956d855f852dc2a41e2f1e18e5e64baa88c214470bf8b5048b1f81cd2e35d045c833f3f49ade86cf8097f03ace7a9de5c3107e51618d663778"
}
