“She adopted two kids from Haiti” is not a positive or negative. But muh immigration...did you read her dissent when the circuit struck down trumps ban based on usage of welfare, etc? no, I can answer for you, you didn’t.
As for the lockdowns: The circuit unanimously agreed that the gov allowing some church services didn’t mean they also had to allow political events because it’s a retarded argument that no judge would allow. They can just sue based on first amendment protections, like the religious groups did...
These points are literally just low information or intentional disinformation
That’s not how courts works, so I don’t know how that’s possible. The governor has a right to enact executive orders, the outcome of those orders can be argued against for various reasons. In this case, they likely could’ve won if they’d made a non-brain dead argument. “Just throw it out” isn’t even an actual option, it wasn’t even being asked for in this case. Either you already have a completely formed opinion or you don’t, but you should at least understand what you are arguing against here. Imagine if it were a Trump enacted executive order you liked and she threw it out based on an unrelated argument from the Dems.
She adopted two black kids from haiti and supported IL lockdowns. Not the best choice out there.
“She adopted two kids from Haiti” is not a positive or negative. But muh immigration...did you read her dissent when the circuit struck down trumps ban based on usage of welfare, etc? no, I can answer for you, you didn’t.
As for the lockdowns: The circuit unanimously agreed that the gov allowing some church services didn’t mean they also had to allow political events because it’s a retarded argument that no judge would allow. They can just sue based on first amendment protections, like the religious groups did...
These points are literally just low information or intentional disinformation
Why does the gov get to allow anything at all? It's a fucking non argument in the first place. She should have thrown it out.
That’s not how courts works, so I don’t know how that’s possible. The governor has a right to enact executive orders, the outcome of those orders can be argued against for various reasons. In this case, they likely could’ve won if they’d made a non-brain dead argument. “Just throw it out” isn’t even an actual option, it wasn’t even being asked for in this case. Either you already have a completely formed opinion or you don’t, but you should at least understand what you are arguing against here. Imagine if it were a Trump enacted executive order you liked and she threw it out based on an unrelated argument from the Dems.
Now I can’t stop singing m m m my Corona. Your username! 😂