Jump to content

Mlle. Zabzie

Members
  • Content count

    5,919
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Mlle. Zabzie

  • Rank
    Charades!
  • Birthday 08/25/1977

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female

Recent Profile Visitors

9,393 profile views
  1. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    Corporations have been persons for a long time. They have legal personality, but not actual personality...except maybe Wendy's twitter account.
  2. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    Worse, she was REALLY GOOD at it. HOW DARE SHE?
  3. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    Thanks for clarifying. Wasn't clear from context.
  4. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    No. This court is heavily textualist and generally rejects "legislative history", or the intent of the draftspersons, in interpreting statutes. How textualism is applied by the various members varies. Some of the members believe that you should read the text and should apply the words of the text as such words were understood at the time that the text was written. Others just look at the text and apply the words of the text as they are understood today, but always in context of the text as a whole (not the individual words in the text). Nope. 25th Amendment wasn't adopted until 1965. Was adopted in the context of the Kennedy assassination, including LBJ's less than stellar health. Also, historically, the example of Woodrow Wilson was probably still remembered, though 50 years in the past.
  5. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    No, it's just a different standard and equally subjective and undefined.
  6. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    Nah. Don't kid yourself; 25th Amendment is also political.
  7. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    Agree entirely. But I know Pat Cippollone (to my everlasting shame), and I have to grudgingly admit that Pat is an excellent writer, particularly in the advocacy concept, and I think Rippounet and others are falling for Pat's ability to write convincing prose.
  8. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    Yeah, but there is going to be whining whatsoever the Democrats do. Nothing in that letter seems more than lawyering to me. There isn't a perfect "process" because there is no "process." And the erosion of norms you are discussion has already happened. Also, the history of actual presidential impeachments isn't exactly a model of good behavior and rectitude. The original proceeding against Andrew Johnson was 100% a political hit job. The second one was similar. So...you know...not buying your arguments.
  9. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    Honestly, there IS no book. Impeachment has happened twice, once in the 19th Century. There is a real separation of powers issue here. And norms are being violated the other direction that would accumulate a tremendous amount of power in the Executive Branch, which is probably not warranted. I don't have a problem with a little hardball within the penumbra of the uncertainty of the law, and frankly, operating as if everything were Queensbury Rules and taking the most conservative (little c) route here is naive at best and dangerous to the republic at worst.
  10. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    Yeah - wasn't clear. They won't overturn Roe. Roe will remain "precedent." HOWEVER, like others, I think they will change the Casey standard such that states can pretty much do whatever they want to do as long as there isn't a total ban.
  11. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    I believe Caligula stopped an invasion of Britain to attack the sea god Neptune instead. But that comes from the notorious gossip Suetonius, so is maybe apocryphal, or the "seashells" gathered as spoils of war might have been slang for something else. But I prefer the Suetonius story, my own self.
  12. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    Yeah agree - also I think the stare decisis taboo was stronger. I'm pretty sure as of June 30, 2020, Roe's only remaining relevance will be that the federal government will not be able to regulate a state's ability to permit abortions, which, of course, will (i) cause certain parts of the constituency to have a states' rights v. outlaw abortion struggle (know how that turns out!) and (ii) cause there to be a lot more pressure to find a federal angle.
  13. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    Right - I view the Louisiana case as an additional push in the direction of getting the federal government out of the business [WHICH IT SHOULD BE IN] of ensuring that women have the right to sovereignty over their own bodies. Functionally, the federal right is pretty much gone already because of Casey and its mishy mushy "undue burden" standard. I'm actually sort of surprised that Casey lasted as long as it did, because it's not good law, but it has held because no one has really had the stomach to do anything else. I personally think it is relatively likely that Casey gets overruled/functionally overruled, that Roe stands on a titular basis, but the new standard (whatever it is) will functionally overrule 7/8 of Roe.
  14. Mlle. Zabzie

    US Politics - I'm not orange I'mpeach

    Indeed. Caligulesque. (or, perhaps we should call him Guantigula...but I digress).
  15. Mlle. Zabzie

    Careerchat III

    My view is that sort of depends what the issue is, your position at the company, who the company is (and whether it is publicly traded), and a bunch of other stuff. I personally also think if you have to ask, you shouldn't share, even in the vague and hypothetical sense. Less about anything like that in writing the better.
×