![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/8f2046ae-5d2e-495f-b467-f7b14ccb4152.png)
Does “condemned” mean “expelled” or “told not to get caught” in British?
Does “condemned” mean “expelled” or “told not to get caught” in British?
It’s on the landing page, in the third “recent rulings” that helpfully even has Trump in the name, but go on.
Removed by mod
If he hadn’t assaulted her he might have been able to make her pay his dry cleaning bill.
You can stop pretending to be a JAQing off American, btw. You outed yourself to all the native speakers.
Removed by mod
Like you read it regardless.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
When Russia does it it’s called penal battalions.
Transcripts are posted after rulings.
Or you could just read one of the many, many, many articles quoting her dissent.
Or watch a video quoting her.
That’s the dissent’s warning.
I guess the surviving members of the Court can reopen the question!
I’ll take the red fascist mobo for use in the Second American Civil War, np
No, because he’s a coward and an appeaser.
Btw, your cope that it has to be the President specifically doing the acts is disagreed with by Sonya Sotomayor in her dissent where she states outright that this decision makes political assassination legal.
But you’d know the implications better than a SC Justice who works with the fascist members of the Court, right?
He won’t. The assault is on tape and clearly not justified by self defense. The woman’s nose was even broken, so he can’t argue no true harm was caused.
Him. Provocation is usually a mitigating factor, but not a complete defense, and it’s not like she just randomly threw a drink at him, there was an argument leading to it.
Even when it would be a defense it certainly wouldn’t excuse him in this circumstance.
One less Trump vote.
Oh, nice, just realized I never played the first
Might just not have any serious competition.
Here’s a hint: stop editorializing when you’re JAQing it. Makes it a little obvious.