Josey_Wales

This is 100% a political stunt that will go nowhere. If this gets to a trial the jury is active duty military of the same rank or higher than the accused. That’s means the men and women that took over when these people retired will be the jury. These individuals served their careers together.

Even with a court martial not needing a unanimous jury, they won’t be able to field enough Trump supporters to convict that high up the chain.

Edit: typo

Find out what level offense this is in your state. Likely is not a crime (misdemeanor or felony) but a violation for the first offense.

If it is a misdemeanor, get a public defender and ask for a plea to a lesser charge.

There is likely a standard plea offer for all similarly situated charges/defendants. It may change depending on whether you have renewed your license. If that’s the case you can ask for additional time to renew. That will buy you another court date but give you a chance to get a better resolution if you fix the issue.

Dress like you would for church or a job interview.

Make sure your cellphone is on silent (and if you think it could ring by accident just turn your phone off when in court)

*The process in your local area will vary

I don’t see why people with money should get benefits in ~~the legal~~ a capitalist system.

I agree cash bail is insane, however, reframing the problem should help make it clear what is really going on

Care to expand on this?

Genuinely asking how Elon Musk unilaterally defying a unanimous court order is losing the “last scrap of pretense at democratic rule of law.” Seems like more of the same old oligarchy games like it always has been.

Tell me you have never been to Randall’s Island without saying you’ve never been to Randall’s island…

Whats on Randall's Island

If anything the NIMBY crowd in NYC wants to keep this population here.

This is why turnout matters. If enough people vote against Trump the mandate will restore faith in the election results. Harris/Waltz need to win with a clear mandate. If not we will still be dealing with MAGA going forward.

So you are admitting there is a conflict between two laws that needs to be reconciled.

I propose creating a system… we could call it the “law conflict figuring out process or “LCFOP” for short. It would be a perfect place for people to voice thoughts that come after phrases like “To me a law means…”

It’s a crazy idea I know.

Edit: Also, this last comment you made at least digs into the substance of the issue in a way your initial reactionary comment does not. Thank you for adding to the conversation about the rights use of religion as a Trojan Horse for conservative legal positions.

Can’t argue with that understanding of the US legal system.

Court's Decision

How is this church acting like it is above the law in this specific instance?

It used the legal system to get a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of town land use code. Seems like it followed the law and the process is playing out as intended.