July 10th, 1949

With Wallace in the House and Tom C. Clark as his attorney general, the duo got to work, aiming to end segregation in the District of Columbia before using the momentum from desegregation efforts in the District to advance the President's domestic agenda with reduced Republican support. Aided in this effort by the 1948 National Committee on Segregation in the Nation’s Capital, which stated "segregation in D.C. commercial operations was more rigid than anywhere in the South," Tom C. Clark took quick action. Stating that preexisting ordinances by the D.C. Council in 1872 and 1873 were not repealed properly by the D.C. Council, Tom C. Clark in league with the City Commissioners, quickly sued Thompson's Cafeteria for non-compliance with the law.

However, despite the weight of the executive branch and the support from the D.C. District, Thompson's Cafeteria - backed by the Board of Trade - refused to budge. The initial result was a failure for the Wallace administration as the Municipal Court in DC ruled against the administration's position, stating that since DC's governments was changed in 1878 by an Act of Congress, the 1872 and 1873 statures no longer applied as the government that instituted these laws were "obsolete". Soon after, the administration petitioned the Supreme Court for emergency relief and review, not wanting a lengthy appeals process that might continue past the current administration to an administration who is... not as liberal on desegregation.

The Supreme Court, in recognition of Southern discontent as well as the request by the Wallace administration, bypassed the Washington Municipal Court of Appeals and the 4th U.S. Court of Appeals, taking the case up directly. In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court has sided in favor of the Wallace administration, making its arguments on three points: "that the failure of the executive branch to enforce a law does not result in its modification or repeal," "Congress did not revoke the acts after the 1878 Organic Law that restructured DC's local government," and "after the Code of 1901, if the Commissioners had the authority to replace these anti-discrimination laws with others ones, we find no indication that they ever did so."

Following the court ruling, Washington D.C. has quickly desegregated with little to none resistance across the city. Only in the South has the Court's ruling found much resistance as Southern Conservatives - now beginning to see Wallace's plan - have be

So I have finally managed to complete the draft-ish of my joke lawsuit of United States v. Usada Kensetsu! Do check it out when you have the time and leave a comment, funny or critique. I would love to hear your thoughts wwwww

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U8UtSrk3gVfknF9D2pTlPwcFEAjh0-Uz9hJDvDLYTf8/edit?usp=sharing

Hi gang - This is my best attempt at compiling as many key documents as possible to summarize what’s happened so far at trial.

This is meant to be a non-comprehensive summary, aiming for clarity and brevity over depth. If you want to learn more about the trial please take the time to read some of the news articles about it because that’s how adults learn about information going on in the world.

If you have any questions please put it in the megathread. Please keep this thread as a place for substantial updates rather than generalized discussion. Just from my own bias, I’m not going to consider information relating to which family member sat next to who and who sighed deeply as they walked through the door as a “substantial” update.

For my own sanity, and organization, I'm going to update it once daily after court adjourns for the day.

(note: the G#1 notation is just for me to keep track of how many witnesses from each side have gone thus far. It has no legal nor official significance)

November 29 - Evidentiary Hearing

Brief synopsis: Evidentiary hearing was held to determine whether evidence of the prior acts of molestation were admissible. Bobye Holt, a family friend, testified that Pest had confessed to her when he was younger and that the molestation took place over the course of years. Jim Bob Duggar testified and claimed to not remember much about the molestation but that it wasn’t a huge deal. The Defense claims that the information Pest confessed to Holt should be excluded under the clergy-penitent privilege rule.

People

Minute Order for Evidentiary Hearing

November 30 - Jury Selection

Brief synopsis: Both parties filed motions following up on the arguments from the previous day. Jury selection began. The potential witness list of 28 included Jill Dillard, Jedidiah Duggar, Jim Holt, Bobye Holt, Caleb Williams (note: I can’t seem to find the full list available anywhere but if you have others to add onto this list and have a source for it please let me know!). The jury was seated.

Government Motion

Defense Motion

[WGN9](https://wgntv.com/news/jurors-alternates-selected-in-josh-duggars-child-porn

!!Enjoy🔴!! ▷ World Junior Ice Hockey Championships Live Free ⤵⤵⤵🔴

Click Here To watch IIHF World Junior Championship 2022 Live Online

Watch IIHF World Junior Live Stream

*[#!ice Hockey TV]ᐈ World Juniors live streams—2022 IIHF U20 World Championship Live Free—World Juniors 2022 live stream—IIHF World Junior Championship 2022 Live Stream—World Junior Hockey Live Stream—iihf world junior championship live stream—U20 Hockey World Championship 2022 live—Hockey Live Stream.

United States v New Zealand | End of Year Internationals 2021

Venue: FedexField, Washington, D.C. | Weather: 16 C, Clouds

Officials: Angus Gardner, Moe Chaudhry, Scott Green, Brett Cronan (tmo)

Match Threads: /r/rugbyunion/wiki/matchthread

When

Lineups

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

Front. Nutr., 13 January 2022 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2021.748847

United States Dietary Trends Since 1800: Lack of Association Between Saturated Fatty Acid Consumption and Non-communicable Diseases

Joyce H. Lee1,2, Miranda Duster1, Timothy Roberts3 and Orrin Devinsky1

* 1Department of Neurology, New York University, Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, United States

2Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, United States

3New York University, Health Sciences Library, New York, NY, United States We reviewed data on the American diet from 1800 to 2019.

Methods: We examined food availability and estimated consumption data from 1808 to 2019 using historical sources from the federal government and additional public data sources.

Results: Processed and ultra-processed foods increased from <5 to >60% of foods. Large increases occurred for sugar, white and whole wheat flour, rice, poultry, eggs, vegetable oils, dairy products, and fresh vegetables. Saturated fats from animal sources declined while polyunsaturated fats from vegetable oils rose. Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) rose over the twentieth century in parallel with increased consumption of processed foods, including sugar, refined flour and rice, and vegetable oils. Saturated fats from animal sources were inversely correlated with the prevalence of NCDs.

Conclusions: As observed from the food availability data, processed and ultra-processed foods dramatically increased over the past two centuries, especially sugar, white flour, white rice, vegetable oils, and ready-to-eat meals. These changes paralleled the rising incidence of NCDs, while animal fat consumption was inversely correlated.

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2021.748847/full#

Discussion

The American diet has changed radically in the past two centuries, with the most marked changes including increased consumption of processed and ultra-processed food (e.g., sugar, white flour, white rice, and industrial seed/vegetable oils) and poultry and reduced consumption of unprocessed foods (e.g., fresh fruits and vegetables) and animal fats (e.g., whole milk, butter, and lard). Changes in food availability over the past two centuries included (1) increased processed and ultra-processed foods, sugar, industrial seed oils, and poultry; and (2) de

Since the pretrial conference kicked off today we thought it would be best to create a new megapost of all substantial trial updates. PLEASE CHECK HERE BEFORE SHARING UPDATES and make sure that it hasn't already been shared. This applies to different news sources sharing the same information - If we have the information already, we don't need someone posting a different source repeating it.

Check out the previous megapost for the past 6 months of updates that have gotten us this far.

FAQs:

Who is testifying? We only know that Jim Bob has been attempted to be contacted to serve as a witness and it appears that Bobye Holt may also testify. Other than that we have no confirmation either way if any of the sisters or family members will testify. We know that the Government is asking an inmate, Robert Franklin, to testify. Dwain Swanson and Matthew Waller were also mentioned as witnesses.

Will the trial be streamed online? Can I go in person? Federal trials cannot be recorded by law. It should be open to the public but media outlets usually get priority when it comes to seating, for in person viewership. The best bet would be to get to the courthouse early in the day to try to get a seat; keep in mind that any access to social media or electronics are strictly prohibited during the proceeding. We have no way of knowing how packed the courtroom will or wont be.

Can the past statements from the family regarding the molestation be used at trial? More than likely, no, they would be hearsay since they're out of court statements. To get that evidence the Government would need to provide that witness themself to provide testimony under oath at trial.

FREE ACCESS TO THE DOCKET IS AVAILABLE HERE

Updates on the proceedings

Judge Brooks orders an evidentiary hearing with witnesses scheduled for Nov 29 11/18

Summary of the pretrial conferences - Evidentiary questions at issue, possible witnesses, etc.11/18

[Livestream from two

Link to court document 569

Dear Judge Nathan:

We write concerning an issue of pressing importance. It has come to the attention of the defense that one of the twelve jurors in this case (the “Juror”) has been giving oral and videotaped interviews to various members of the press concerning the jury deliberations. These interviews have been publicly reported in several media outlets. (Footnote 1)

Among other things, the Juror told reporters that he disclosed to the other members of the jury during deliberations that he was a victim of sexual abuse and further described his memory of those events. According to the Juror, his disclosure influenced the deliberations and convinced other members of the jury to convict Ms. Maxwell.

MUCH OF THE LETTER IS REDACTED and then it picks up with

…presents incontrovertible grounds for a new trial under Rule 33.

REDACTIONS REDACTIONS REDACTIONS REDACTIONS REDACTIONS REDACTIONS REDACTIONS REDACTIONS

Should the defense prevail on this motion—and we believe the law and facts are clearly on our side—it would render all other post-trial motions moot. Ms. Maxwell should not have to expend precious time and resources briefing other motions when this motion can and should be dispositive.

Accordingly, the defense respectfully requests that the Court set a briefing schedule for this motion alone and defer setting a briefing schedule for any other post-trial motions.

Christian Everdell

Footnote 1 ^(See Lucia Osborne-Crowley, “‘They were all believable’: Maxwell juror says the jury was convinced by accusers’ accounts of a pattern of abuse,” The Independent (Jan. 4, 2022); Laura Collins and Daniel Bates, “‘Ghislaine was a predator as guilty as Epstein’: Maxwell juror describes the moment he ‘locked eyes’ with sex trafficker and reveals his own abuse ordeal,” Daily Mail (Jan. 5, 2022), available at https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-)

^(10370193/Ghislaine-Maxwell-juror-says-evidence-convinced-panel-predator.html; Luc Cohen, “Some Ghislaine)

^(Maxwell jurors initially doubted accusers, juror says,” Reuters (Jan. 5, 2022).)

My very basic understanding of the US Supreme Court is that today its primary function is to rule on wether or not laws are constitutional. But if I understand it correctly, Marbury v. Madison (1803) marks the first time the court ruled that a law established by Congress was unconstitutional. So what were they even doing before that landmark case?

First of all nearly everyone in this fight is going to be old as fuck. The minimum age is 35 and I'm not sure who the youngest senator is. For the Republicans they have the heavy hitters of Tom Cotton (only 44 years old) Josh Hawley (also very young and we know he lifts) and Rand Paul (who has experience fighting his neighbor). Also the Republican caucus is overwhelmingly male so that might give them an advantage.

For the Democrats it looks like their big hitters would be Booker and Ossoff (both obviously in shape and young)and Peters (big chungus energy)

The arena: The senate floor.

Rules: No rules other than no weapons or improvised weapons like hitting someone with a chair.

Preparation: Both sides get 1 week advance to prepare and train for the fight.

Introduced: Sponsor: Sen. Charles “Chuck” Grassley [R-IA]

This bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs which will consider it before sending it to the Senate floor for consideration.

1 cosponsor is on that committee.

Govtrack.us Summary

Again, too busy to do much of a write-up, but here's the case!

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/1984/64.html

Some possible conversation starters:

• Have you had to refer to this case in practice?
• Did you have to study this case in uni?
• Do you disagree with the decision?
• Do you know of any good articles or case notes for this case?
• Do you have any insights about how it has been applied since?

Alternatively, perhaps /u/WrongsAct would like to kick things off by explaining why he suggested it?

I was watching a rant from Connecticut senator Chris Murphy the other day about how hypocritical it is for the Republicans to claim to be pro-life during these judicial hearings while refusing to budge on gun control in America (because there was a school shooting in Michigan recently for context). What caught my attention was that he brought up the fact that the biggest drop in murder rates in America both occurred almost immediately after two of the biggest federal regulations concerning firearms in the past century. Now gun control isn't the topic I wanted to bring up, what I wanted to add is that there are loads of studies that show that crime in general also declined significantly in the decades following the decision of Roe V. Wade. America isn't the only country where this is the case, there's been similar studies in Canada and Romania that have shown that reduced crime rates do actually coincide with access to birth control and abortion over a period of several generations.

I don't think I need to explain why this happens, being forced to give birth when you're unprepared, physically at risk, or just straight up don't want to is an absolutely horrid scenario. But it's one that, never the less, the right wing of this country wants to shove down our throats. Compared to our allies, we also fail women when it comes to maternity leave, child care, your health insurance is tied to your job and if you're relying on your spouse's job for that, and your spouse is a prick who randomly decides to kick you off, you're screwed. But beyond just how messed up this is for women who will have unwanted pregnancies (which I can't emphasize enough IS more than enough reason to be concerned and hate that this decision is happening), even if you don't care about women this is still horrid for everyone else. Foster facilities will be overrun, hospitals will be hit hard WHILST we're still in a pandemic. Crimes will escalate due to children being raised in households that can't adequately provide for them so they'll be driven to pursue other avenues. Literally all sects of society will be hurt by this decision.

I'm a cis guy, so I'm not trying to claim to know what it's like to have to worry about dying in childbirth or wondering if I should get my tubes tied following a supreme court hearing. Nor am I pretending that this information isn't already firmly in the back of many women's minds on here. I guess I just needed to rant because I'm so sick and tired of the past c