Every year about 8,000 people file their cases for cert at the Supreme Court. Each year they grant cert on about 80. Roughly 1/1000 odds. Those about 8,000 cases include cases that have also previously filed in past years without cert.

Amicus briefs are not uncommon. They often don’t grant cert when there are no novel legal questions. The Supreme Court simply doesn’t not have the ability to hear every appeal. Them not granting cert in any case should not be taken as a dispositive.

In 21/50 you need a license.

The real question is why the hell is a governor engaging in international trade or diplomacy? Art. 1 Sec 8.

Well said. A sober look at the lives of these people often reveals a sad truth.

9/10 sovereign citizens are victims. 1/10 are charlatans selling a fiction to those in dire need of a way out of legal trouble.

I would challenge you to listen to the other entirely if

Yeah that doesn’t solve the issue of planting a bomb, though.

“Your honor my client was only engaged in economic terrorism” is not a good excuse.

Cool story, the jury will still consider it murder.

That still would be barred by Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020). If they do any on that basis they’d instantly get sued. 7/9 of the justices are the same since them. 4 members of the majority remain on the court and the two new appointments both should be predicted to uphold the precedent.

This one has been involved in multiple incidents seemingly involving her. They also apparently have a security guard so non zero chance someone was working graveyard shift.

They’re probably seeing if this was an act of economic terrorism. Feds are big on interstate commerce.

The GOA backs him and given his speech at their conference I’m willing to bet he isn’t keen on doing that.

Put musk in the title so people with filters don’t have to be reminded.

Yeah that’s how it works.

Other comments in this thread reflect a lack of appreciation for the prior system. Once upon a time the king’s men could arrest legislators unfavorable to him to bar unfavorable legislation. Today we have legislation barring the arrest of representatives while the house is in session.

On Boost still showed up

That’s the danger of protecting rights only by judicial doctrine. It forestalls actual legislative attempts to create protections.

The denied water part seems strange. Most American jails have water fountain toilet combos like this: