discriminatory thus unconstitutional? If this law is as racist as Clinton, Holder, Obama, et al say it is, why not sue on those grounds? Why use the supremacy clause?
Don't get me wrong, they don't have a case either way...
EDIT: Vern, Vern, Vern... Facially Discriminatory not Disparate Impact.
EDIT: Vern, I hope you're not a lawyer...
EDIT: I tried to get the briefs but the federal court needs a credit card and charges like six cents a page...
Don't get me wrong, they don't have a case either way...
EDIT: Vern, Vern, Vern... Facially Discriminatory not Disparate Impact.
EDIT: Vern, I hope you're not a lawyer...
EDIT: I tried to get the briefs but the federal court needs a credit card and charges like six cents a page...