YubNub Social YubNub Social
    #history #automotiveengineering #ford #fmc #automotive
    Advanced Search
  • Login
  • Register

  • Day mode
  • © 2025 YubNub Social
    About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

    Select Language

  • English
Install our *FREE* WEB APP! (PWA)
Night mode toggle
Community
News Feed (Home) Popular Posts Events Blog Market Forum
Media
Go LIVE! Headline News VidWatch Game Zone Top PodCasts
Explore
Explore Offers
© 2025 YubNub Social
  • English
About • Directory • Contact Us • Developers • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • shareasale • FB Webview Detected • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App
Advertisement
Stop Seeing These Ads

Discover posts

Posts

Users

Pages

Group

Blog

Market

Events

Games

Forum

Daily Signal Feed
Daily Signal Feed
1 y

In Frozen Embryos Case‚ Alabama Supreme Court Demonstrates Proper Method of Adjudication
Favicon 
www.dailysignal.com

In Frozen Embryos Case‚ Alabama Supreme Court Demonstrates Proper Method of Adjudication

The Alabama Supreme Court’s recent 7-2 decision that a frozen embryo is a “child” under the state’s wrongful-death statute demonstrates once again that judges have to use the right method to make the right decisions. Keeping this in mind prevents getting distracted by the politics and hysterics that often accompany decisions on such volatile issues. In this case‚ three married couples used in vitro fertilization to conceive children. Some of the embryos were implanted and resulted in the birth of healthy babies. Other embryos were preserved in a cryogenic nursery located in the same building as the local hospital. In December 2020‚ a hospital patient entered the nursery and removed several embryos. The patient accidentally dropped the embryos because the extremely cold containers freeze-burned the patient’s hands. The embryos were destroyed when they were dropped—essentially killing them.  The couples sued the nursery and hospital under the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act‚ a state law enacted in 1872 that allows the parents of a deceased child to sue “[w]hen the death of a minor child is caused by the wrongful act‚ omission or negligence of any person.” Although the statute does not define the term “minor child‚” the Alabama Supreme Court previously held that it includes an unborn child‚ regardless of viability or stage of development. This case‚ however‚ focused on the where‚ rather than the when‚ a minor child was killed. Alabama legislators knew about unborn children in the womb when they enacted the wrongful-death statute. However‚ in vitro fertilization produces unborn children outside the womb before they are implanted into the women for gestational purposes. What is a judge supposed to do when the law is old‚ but the facts are new? This is where the method a judge uses to decide the case makes all the difference. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has explained that judges should decide cases that involve written law such as statutes in two steps. Judges must first interpret the statute‚ or figure out what the legislature meant by the text it enacted‚ and then apply that interpretation to the facts of a particular case. But how are judges supposed to put that theory into practice when‚ as with the Alabama wrongful-death statute‚ the law is more than 150 years old? Joined by five other justices‚ Justice Jay Mitchell answered that question in his majority opinion. Courts begin by assuming that‚ in the absence of evidence to the contrary‚ legislatures use words in their “natural‚ ordinary‚ commonly understood meaning.” When the Alabama legislature enacted the wrongful-death statute in 1872‚ Mitchell explained‚ the word “child” was commonly understood to include the unborn. The Alabama legislature has enacted a series of strong pro-life laws‚ and Mitchell observed that‚ in 2022‚ Alabama voters amended the state constitution to require that judges construe statutes in a way that protects the rights of the unborn and a born child equally. That reinforced the court’s previous conclusion that “child” in the wrongful-death statute included unborn children at any stage of development. And it supported the majority’s conclusion that the wrongful-death statute “applies on its face to all unborn children‚ without limitation.” Criticism of the majority by three justices appeared based on what they thought the statute should have said. Justice Brady Mendheim’s separate opinion‚ for example‚ agreed with the majority’s result‚ but thought it “problematic” that the majority had not considered that “IVF was not even a scientific possibility” when the legislature enacted the wrongful-death statute. Similarly‚ dissenting Justice Will Sellers emphasized the subjective “intent of the Act‚” rather than objective meaning of the words that the legislature put in the statute.   In other words‚ they used the wrong method by mixing interpretation and application‚ rather than keeping them separate. If a statute’s meaning is limited by how it could have been applied when the legislature enacted it‚ virtually every statute would rapidly become obsolete and have to be constantly reenacted. Consider the chaos that using this method in constitutional cases would cause. The Fourth Amendment‚ which prohibits “unreasonable searches and seizures‚” could not be applied to wiretaps because electronic communication methods did not exist in 1791. The First Amendment’s guarantee of “freedom of speech” would not apply to films or online publications‚ as they likewise didn’t exist in 1791. You get the point. That’s why judges must start with a statute’s text‚ then figure out what the legislature meant by it‚ and then apply it to the facts of each case as it comes along. Using that method allowed the court in this case first to determine what the word “child” meant in the wrongful-death statute‚ even though it was enacted in 1872‚ and whether that included an unborn child without any limitation on the child’s location. Justice Greg Cook’s dissent‚ which spanned 57 pages‚ appeared to take issue with the court’s previous decisions that the wrongful-death statute applied generally to unborn children. And he speculated about the impact of the majority’s decision‚ claiming that it “will mean that the creation of frozen embryos will end in Alabama.”  Just four pages later‚ Cook himself noted that “because these appeals are at the motion-to-dismiss stage … there is no factual record at this point‚” undermining any basis for his prediction. Whether that prediction is reasonable‚ however‚ is irrelevant because the legislature‚ not the courts‚ has the authority to consider such policy matters.   Predictably‚ the media uniformly misreported what the court actually decided in this case. “Alabama Court Ruled Frozen Embryos Are Children‚” reported CBS. Virtually identical headlines came from USA Today‚ National Public Radio‚ The Washington Post and many other outlets. The Post went even further‚ claiming that “the State Supreme Court ruled Friday that frozen embryos are people.” Using that broad a brush makes this decision appear‚ perhaps intentionally‚ radical rather than common sense. The truth is that the court looked at the wrongful-death statute for what it says and refused to see a location restriction that the legislature did not put there. By using the proper method of interpreting the statute’s text and then separately applying it‚ the majority was able to settle this legal dispute and leave the policy speculation and issue politics to the legislature. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The post In Frozen Embryos Case‚ Alabama Supreme Court Demonstrates Proper Method of Adjudication appeared first on The Daily Signal.
Like
Comment
Share
Hot Air Feed
Hot Air Feed
1 y

Will SCOTUS Climb Out on a Timbs for Trump?
Favicon 
hotair.com

Will SCOTUS Climb Out on a Timbs for Trump?

Will SCOTUS Climb Out on a Timbs for Trump?
Like
Comment
Share
Hot Air Feed
Hot Air Feed
1 y

The MSM Is Corrupt Beyond Repair
Favicon 
hotair.com

The MSM Is Corrupt Beyond Repair

The MSM Is Corrupt Beyond Repair
Like
Comment
Share
Hot Air Feed
Hot Air Feed
1 y

Doggone It! Biden's Canine Chomped Down More Often Than Was Reported
Favicon 
hotair.com

Doggone It! Biden's Canine Chomped Down More Often Than Was Reported

Doggone It! Biden's Canine Chomped Down More Often Than Was Reported
Like
Comment
Share
Science Explorer
Science Explorer
1 y

NASA Wants People To Pretend To Be Martians For A Whole Year
Favicon 
www.iflscience.com

NASA Wants People To Pretend To Be Martians For A Whole Year

NASA hopes to have astronauts on Mars in the near future. It is not going to be an easy journey and being on another world will be extremely dangerous. The space agency wants to be there as prepared as possible. And part of that requires volunteers who want to take part in a 12-month-long simulation of living on Mars.The first CHAPEA (Crew Health and Performance Exploration Analog) mission started on June 25‚ 2023‚ and NASA is now looking for the next four simul-astronauts to take the place of Dr Kelly Haston‚ Ross Brockwell‚ Dr Nathan Jones‚ and Dr Anca Selariu. Their mission ends on July 6‚ 2024. The next CHAPEA mission is expected to start in the spring of 2025.“NASA is looking for healthy‚ motivated U.S. citizens or permanent residents who are non-smokers‚ 30-55 years old‚ and proficient in English for effective communication between crewmates and mission control. Applicants should have a strong desire for unique‚ rewarding adventures and interest in contributing to NASA’s work to prepare for the first human journey to Mars‚” NASA wrote in an announcement post.        Applications can now be submitted‚ with an April 2 deadline. The selection process will be similar to that of astronauts in terms of skills‚ although it is a shorter turnaround‚ as it is expected to last between 12 and 14 months.“Crew selection will follow additional standard NASA criteria for astronaut candidate applicants. A master’s degree in a STEM field such as engineering‚ mathematics‚ or biological‚ physical or computer science from an accredited institution with at least two years of professional STEM experience or a minimum of one thousand hours piloting an aircraft is required‚” NASA explained‚ although medical doctors‚ people currently working towards a STEM Ph.D.‚ and a few other groups might be considered.  The individual crew rooms for the astronauts in the simulated 3D-printed habitat.Image credit: NASA/Bill StaffordThe team will have to go on simulated spacewalks‚ perform robotic operations‚ keep up the habitat‚ maintain a regular exercise regime‚ and grow crops for subsistence. Communications with the outside world happen with at least a 20-minute delay; at its closest distance‚ Mars is just three light-minutes away but at its furthest‚ is about 22 and a half light-minutes away. And this simulation is all about hardships.        The crew will have to face resource limitations‚ equipment failures‚ and environmental stressors on top of communication delays. While many questions in the applications are about the ability to go through these challenges for over a year‚ NASA asks also if the candidates can go without speaking to their loved ones for periods of over two weeks.Participants will be paid for this mission‚ but how much has not been disclosed. This information will be provided to candidates during the screening process.
Like
Comment
Share
Science Explorer
Science Explorer
1 y

Some Of Earth’s Oldest Biomass Reveals Biological Diversity Soon After Life Began
Favicon 
www.iflscience.com

Some Of Earth’s Oldest Biomass Reveals Biological Diversity Soon After Life Began

Three and a half billion years ago life had not only found a way‚ but diversified‚ so that all these years later we can observe differences in what was left behind.The Earth has undergone so many cycles of geologic uplift and destruction that there is very little left of the rocks from the time when life had just begun. Parts of Western Australia represent one of the few exceptions‚ holding traces of microorganisms 3.48 billion years old.Barite is a particularly promising material to study from this time‚ since it is stable under high temperature and pressure conditions‚ and does not dissolve easily in water.Black bedded barite samples analyzed by University of Göttingen PhD student Lena Weimann and colleagues come from calderas‚ hollows that form after volcanic eruptions and often fill with lakes. Hot fluids in the caldera provide both energy and nutrients to lifeforms today‚ and such environments are good candidates for the places where life first evolved. Trapped in the barite‚ the team found carbonaceous particles whose molecular size indicates they were left behind by early lifeforms.“As our findings show‚ original traces of the first organisms can still be found even from extremely old material‚” Weimann said in a statement. Barite (barium sulfate) from the Pilbara Craton in Western Australia shows three sorts of organic molecules‚ two of which were apparently living at the same time.Image credit: Gerhard HundertmarkNot a lot of information about these organisms has survived‚ although we know they must have been single-celled. That might suggest there is little we can learn. However‚ when Weimann’s team combined several high-resolution observation techniques they found three distinct sorts‚ which they call populations‚ of carbonaceous material.These indicate that the life forms of the day had evolved to fill separate niches even at this early point in time.The most common population is found at the edges of single growth bands of barite crystals. A second is found finely distributed within the barite matrix‚ while the third is found within quartz veins that crisscross the barite. The first two were apparently deposited as the barite crystallized‚ while the quartz apparently entered the system at least 200 million years later‚ accompanied by the third population.The team thinks population one arises from organic particles accumulating on crystal surfaces where the water and sediment met. When the flow of hydrothermal fluid dropped off or temperatures fell‚ biofilms and microbial mats‚ like those formed by single-celled organisms today‚ sometimes became incorporated into the rocks.When the flow picked up‚ particles that may have been from organisms living elsewhere were carried with it. Crystallization rates were higher at these times‚ and the particles got distributed within the growing crystals‚ creating population two.The study is published open access in Precambrian Research.
Like
Comment
Share
Science Explorer
Science Explorer
1 y

Whale Falls: How Dead Whales Go On To Feed An Entire Ecosystem
Favicon 
www.iflscience.com

Whale Falls: How Dead Whales Go On To Feed An Entire Ecosystem

When animals are killed by predators on land in the wild‚ there's a good chance scavengers will descend upon the carcass pretty quickly‚ saving everybody the problem of burial.The same is true in the ocean. Essentially‚ if there are predators out there who do not finish the whole meal‚ you better believe something will come to fit the "I'll just take the scraps" niche. But some carcasses are more difficult to scavenge than others‚ which (along with mermaids) was the surprising subject of a viral X (Twitter) thread on Tuesday.         IFLScience is not responsible for content shared from external sites.After whales die‚ they begin to decompose. Gases during decomposition can sometimes float the animal to the surface‚ where birds and sharks will attempt to tear out chunks‚ over the course of weeks or even over a month. But it isn't easy for the animals. Despite using techniques such as vigorous head thrashing and shaking‚ and body rolling.Generally‚ as noted by Kairo‚ who runs a popular science-based Instagram account‚ the methods are ineffective are getting to the tastiest parts of whales.       IFLScience is not responsible for content shared from external sites.The thread suggests (for fun) that one mythical animal could perfectly fit this niche‚ and have itself an easy life opening up whales and scavenging on the gooey bits inside."MERMAIDS" They have hands! And teamwork! And tools!" Kairo suggests. "There is this unrealized potential to take on this deeply lucrative role of top scavenger that nobody else in the ocean seems to be able to fill."While a fun idea‚ whale carcasses are not going to waste as it is (other than the occasional time they are scattered for miles by overenthusiastic officials using way too much TNT). After weeks of bobbing around‚ they sink and can fall to the bottom of the ocean‚ where their decaying body will feed an ecosystem‚ known as a "whale fall".  Scavengers tend to consume the soft tissues of the animal within months‚ while fragments of flesh feed nearby critters for over a year."The whale skeleton can support rich communities for years to decades‚ both as a hard substrate (or surface) for invertebrate colonization and as a source of sulfides from the decay of organic compounds of whale bones. Microbes live off of the energy released from these chemical reactions and form the basis of ecosystems for as long as the food source lasts‚" the National Ocean Service explains. "At deep sea levels this forms a new food web and provides energy to support single- and multi-cell organisms and sponges‚ thus adding to the ocean's food chain."While scavengers at the surface may struggle to get a share of the carcass‚ scavengers down below sure finish the job.
Like
Comment
Share
Science Explorer
Science Explorer
1 y

Tiny Neck Brace Created For Peruvian Jumping Stick At Houston Zoo
Favicon 
www.iflscience.com

Tiny Neck Brace Created For Peruvian Jumping Stick At Houston Zoo

Working in a zoo presents challenges of all kinds‚ from working to engage the public with conservation issues to making sure every animal has the highest standard of care and welfare. Over at Houston Zoo‚ the team is doing just that – down to some of the smallest residents.In the Bug House‚ a Peruvian jumping stick female was spotted to be in difficulty after shedding her exoskeleton and coming out of the molt. The entomology keepers noticed that the jumping stick had a weakened area in her thoracic region‚ the part of the insect that resembles the neck.“On Feb 5th we noticed her old molt was next to her. She was 'floppy' still – they are very soft and pliable and fragile‚ after molting – so we knew it was molting related. It was obvious that something didn't quite go right.” Julie LaTurner‚ one of the entomology keepers who first noticed the problem‚ told IFLScience. Peruvian jumping sticks spend almost all of their time climbing branches; having a weakened neck was causing the female's head to be affected as she climbed‚ the team wrote on their blog page. These insects are actually a type of grasshopper‚ not a stick insect (Stiphra spp). They live in the tropical rainforests of South America in the wild. The females are much bigger than the males and look quite different‚ a biological phenomenon known as sexual dimorphism. Julie stressed how unusual this sort of problem is among the animals. “Most of the time molting goes perfectly fine. These bugs molt several times before reaching adulthood. This is a fairly rare occurrence‚ and the first time I've seen something this extreme.”Fortunately for the insect‚ Julie was able to work with the vets at the zoo to create a bespoke neck brace for the jumping stick.Without the work from the team‚ the insect would most likely have had to be euthanized.Image Courtesy of Houston Zoo“Bug vet treatments are not really something that is established‚ for many reasons. They are surprisingly complex creatures! I wasn't really sure if our vet‚ Dr Melissa‚ would be able to create something that could work for the time we needed it to‚ or even if our grasshopper would tolerate it."The stick part of a cotton bud was used as it was the perfect flexible material to work for the animal. The situation was quite pressing‚ with the insect’s life hanging in the balance. “If we hadn't come up with a solution‚ she would have had to be euthanized‚ she would not be able to eat with her head in the unnatural position‚ and it was probably also physically uncomfortable. This was ultimately to give her a chance to live‚" explained Julie.The brace was a great success‚ with the jumping stick only needing to wear it for around four days to allow the exoskeleton to harden. She is now moving around her enclosure in a normal way and is able to hold her head in a natural position. This is not the first time zoos have gone above and beyond for the residents – San Diego Zoo created fancy orthopaedic boots for one of their penguins. “She has taught us a lot about invertebrate physiology and health care‚" concluded Julie. "We love our invertebrates‚ and we really want people to learn about them‚ and appreciate the wide variety of lifestyles‚ habits‚ and life histories they have. When you see the bugs in your neighborhood‚ take a moment to look them up and learn about them. You'll find them to be just as fascinating."
Like
Comment
Share
NewsBusters Feed
NewsBusters Feed
1 y

NBC's 'Chicago Med' Lies‚ Claims Pro-Life Laws Punish Women Who Miscarry
Favicon 
www.newsbusters.org

NBC's 'Chicago Med' Lies‚ Claims Pro-Life Laws Punish Women Who Miscarry

Last night‚ Chicago Med promoted the dangerous lie that women who miscarry might get arrested and be denied medical care in a pro-life state. This insidious falsehood has been pushed in liberal establishment media to deliberately create fear in women who do not know the truth about state pro-life laws‚ none of which ban treatment for miscarriage. In the episode‚ "I Make a Promise‚ I Will Never Leave You‚" a pregnant woman named Kaitlin (Katie Anne Moy) arrives at the hospital in a state of septic shock after a long trip from an unnamed rural area.  Her husband Eric (Rammel Chan) tells the OB/Gyn‚ Dr. Hannah Asher (Jessy Schram)‚ that Kaitlin's water broke at 15 weeks gestation‚ but doctors were "afraid" to treat her and "she didn't wanna get arrested."  Asher: Tell me what happened.  Eric: Kaitlin's water broke. Everybody said the fetus couldn't survive at 15 weeks‚ but it was still alive‚ so doctors were afraid to do the D&;E. She didn't wanna get arrested. Where we live‚ that could happen. They sent us home. Kaitlin got sicker and sicker. And I kept calling‚ and they kept telling me it wasn't a life-threatening emergency. Finally‚ I just gave up and started driving here. Kaitlin's from Chicago. When we got married‚ we moved to my family's farm‚ where I grew up. We were so excited when Kaitlin finally got pregnant. She's been so worried she's not gonna be able to again.  This plotline is the sort of fearmongering peddled by abortion activists to scare pregnant woman. Not a single abortion ban in the United States prevents treating a pregnant woman in this situation. Abortion activists and their media fluffers push this disinformation so often that it is they‚ not pro-lifers‚ who place women's lives in danger by creating false hysteria. The show lays the scare tactics on even thicker after Kaitlin's life is saved. Eric tells her they will move to a different place‚ presumably one where abortion is legal‚ so she can get pregnant again without worry. "If you decide you want us to try again‚ you don't have to be afraid‚" he says.  "Well‚ it's good to know there's some good guys in the world‚" Dr. Asher says outside their room. "Yeah‚" a nurse agrees.  In the delusional mind of abortion proponents‚ a woman should only want to become pregnant in a state that fails to protect children in the womb and men who live in states protecting such children are bad. Since the strategy of "shout your abortion" failed so spectacularly over the last decade‚ activists after Roe are now turning to panic-inducing takes like "if you miscarry‚ pro-lifers will arrest you or let you die!"  Sadly‚ there may be women who see this episode and falsely believe such a storyline could happen to them. It's cruel to mislead women this way‚ but Hollywood has been working hand in hand with the abortion movement for decades to deceive women. Last night's episode was just the latest manipulation.
Like
Comment
Share
NewsBusters Feed
NewsBusters Feed
1 y

ABC‚ NBC Whine GOP ‘Upping the Pressure on Biden’ to Secure the Border
Favicon 
www.newsbusters.org

ABC‚ NBC Whine GOP ‘Upping the Pressure on Biden’ to Secure the Border

On Thursday‚ ABC’s Good Morning America and NBC’s Today tried to have their cake and eat it too‚ as they praised President Biden for finally taking executive action to secure the U.S.’s southern border‚ while also whining that Republicans forced him to do it. It was a seminar executive action they condemned former President Trump for enacting. “President Biden is considering executive action on the border to stem the flow of migrants after congressional Republicans killed a bipartisan compromise on border security‚” co-anchor George Stephanopoulos announced‚ framing it as Republicans forcing his hand. Ignoring the fact that the White House and the liberal media had been claiming for years that Biden couldn’t do anything unilaterally to halt the flood of illegal immigrants‚ chief White House correspondent and chief Biden apple polisher Mary Bruce lauded Biden’s possible actions: Well‚ I'm told this morning President Biden is considering possibly taking executive action to impose tough new asylum restrictions‚ including possibly barring migrants from seeking asylum if they cross illegally between U.S. ports of entry. Bruce boasted that “President Biden is eager to show voters that he is taking this issue seriously” as “Republicans on the Hill‚ under pressure from Donald Trump‚ tanked a bipartisan border deal that contained significant new restrictions.”     She kvetched that “Republicans have seized on the chaos at the border‚ turning it into a political liability for the President‚ upping the pressure on Biden to act.” And she lamented that Biden’s executive order “would echo a 2018 effort by then-President Trump to bar and block migrants. It’s something Democrats staunchly opposed at the time‚ and it was blocked by the courts.” Despite noting that Biden’s executive order “would likely face legal challenges” of its own‚ Bruce still commended it as “an opportunity [for Biden] to show he is doing something to address this crisis while Republicans‚ mired in their own in-fighting‚ have failed to do anything through legislation.” The duality of bellyaching that Biden was pressured into taking action and touting the possible action to come was also present on NBC via correspondent Garrett Haake. “It speaks to both the scale of the crisis at the border and the political potency of the immigration issue that the White House is now considering taking actions they have long said only Congress could to stem the flow of migrants at the border‚” he proclaimed. “President would make the change without Congress after Republicans blocked a bipartisan border bill‚” Haake added. But on CBS Mornings‚ chief White House correspondent Nancy Cordes admitted that federal law already allowed the president to take unilateral action to crack down on illegal immigrants. “And so‚ now they're looking at a law known as 212(f) that's been on the books for more than 70 years‚” she said. “It allows the president to suspend the entry of foreigners when it's determined that their arrival is detrimental to the interests of the United States.” Cordes also admitted that the pressure Biden was under was not only coming from Republicans. “Well‚ he's gotten an earful from Democratic governors and mayors who say their cities are inundated by new migrants” and “he does not poll well on this issue‚” she reported. The transcript is below. Click "expand" to read: ABC’s Good Morning America February 22‚ 2024 7:03 a.m. Eastern GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: We’re going to begin‚ Robin‚ at the White House where President Biden is considering executive action on the border to stem the flow of migrants‚ after congressional Republicans killed a bipartisan compromise on border security. Chief White House correspondent Mary Bruce starts us off. Good morning‚ Mary. MARY BRUCE: Good morning George. Well‚ I'm told this morning President Biden is considering possibly taking executive action to impose tough new asylum restrictions‚ including possibly barring migrants from seeking asylum if they cross illegally between U.S. ports of entry. Now‚ I’m told the President is considering a wide range of options‚ no final decisions have been made. But this does come‚ of course‚ after Republicans on the Hill‚ under pressure from Donald Trump‚ tanked a bipartisan border deal that contained significant new restrictions. And as President Biden is eager to show voters that he is taking this issue seriously. Look‚ Republicans have seized on the chaos at the border‚ turning it into a political liability for the President‚ upping the pressure on Biden to act. But if he does impose this executive order‚ it would echo a 2018 effort by then-President Trump to bar and block migrants. It’s something Democrats staunchly opposed at the time‚ and it was blocked by the courts. And if he does take this action‚ it too would likely face legal challenges. But even so‚ politically it would give the President an opportunity to show he is doing something to address this crisis while Republicans‚ mired in their own in-fighting‚ have failed to do anything through legislation.
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 67764 out of 85114
  • 67760
  • 67761
  • 67762
  • 67763
  • 67764
  • 67765
  • 67766
  • 67767
  • 67768
  • 67769
  • 67770
  • 67771
  • 67772
  • 67773
  • 67774
  • 67775
  • 67776
  • 67777
  • 67778
  • 67779
Stop Seeing These Ads

Edit Offer

Add tier








Select an image
Delete your tier
Are you sure you want to delete this tier?

Reviews

In order to sell your content and posts, start by creating a few packages. Monetization

Pay By Wallet

Payment Alert

You are about to purchase the items, do you want to proceed?

Request a Refund