WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

1.3K

I can afford it, could be a lot of fun degrading and deriding the idiot NPCs while working there, and quite profitable in the end!

I can afford it, could be a lot of fun degrading and deriding the idiot NPCs while working there, and quite profitable in the end!

(post is archived)

[–] 0 pt

That's where the battle lies. One may have to take the case all the way to the SCOTUS to eventually win.

[–] 3 pts

Kikes know most people working in these (((big box stores))) can’t financially do that and take the risk to lose on technicalities.

These (((lawyers))) are experts in that field.

[–] 1 pt

Being able to afford a dozen legal battles along the way is key. The end reward should be many, many times the expense, making it a lucrative proposition for those who can afford it.

[–] 3 pts

Yeah, but most people simply can’t afford another mortgage to pay these (((lawyers))) upfront without giving 100% guarantees you’ll win.

[–] 0 pt

Courts don't determine the authority of the Constitution, the Constitution limits the authority of the courts.

It's like no one has ever read the damned thing.

[–] 0 pt

True, the Constitution describes SCOTUS and its scope of power/authority. But the function of SCOTUS is to interpret/apply the Constitution when making judgements concerning the constitutionality of a law and other matters.

[–] 1 pt

Incorrect courts can rule if the application of a law applied in a particular case is valid thereby setting precedent for lower courts.

Here's how checks and balances are supposed to work in the event of a bad law....

  1. Congress passes a bad law
  2. The executive is sworn by oath to uphold the bad law and arrests people
  3. Affected persons try their case before court who rules the application of said law violated that persons rights and dismisses the case
  4. Lower courts now rubber stamp dismissals as established precedent
  5. The people demand the costly law be repealed or at least the executive branch now has cause to not enforce

In no circumstance ever can the court determine that something not directly written is implied or interpreted. If you believe that you believe your subordinates can write your job description.