Jun 16, 2025
Оfftopic Community
Оfftopic Community
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Featured content
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
OffTopic Community
Rant-Whine-Complain-Vent
Why isn't Eric Holder arguing that the Arizona law is facially
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="NormD" data-source="post: 2236749" data-attributes="member: 773294"><p>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?</p><p></p><p>Don't get me wrong, they don't have a case either way...</p><p>EDIT: Vern, Vern, Vern... Facially Discriminatory not Disparate Impact.</p><p>EDIT: Vern, I hope you're not a lawyer...</p><p>EDIT: I tried to get the briefs but the federal court needs a credit card and charges like six cents a page...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="NormD, post: 2236749, member: 773294"] 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... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Name
Verification
Please enable JavaScript to continue.
Loading…
Post reply
Top