n0tA11there
@n0ta11there.bsky.social
iconoclast, eccentric, & curmudgeon. how can I help you today??
no idea who that is.
November 1, 2025 at 2:40 AM
no idea who that is.
mostly because Newark though.
October 10, 2025 at 12:57 PM
mostly because Newark though.
Reposted by n0tA11there
/2 However, something being clearly true as a matter of constitutional law doesn’t translate into something being enforceable without an operative array of institutions and norms, which are failing in America in favor of anti-Constitutional institutions and norms.
August 7, 2025 at 4:18 PM
/2 However, something being clearly true as a matter of constitutional law doesn’t translate into something being enforceable without an operative array of institutions and norms, which are failing in America in favor of anti-Constitutional institutions and norms.
Reposted by n0tA11there
3/ shall be based on the "whole number of persons" residing in the state. Persons. It couldn't be more clear. Unless the argument is that undocumented residents aren't human or aren't alive they have to be counted.
August 7, 2025 at 3:57 PM
3/ shall be based on the "whole number of persons" residing in the state. Persons. It couldn't be more clear. Unless the argument is that undocumented residents aren't human or aren't alive they have to be counted.
Reposted by n0tA11there
2/ made this more clear and expanded it since the authors of the 14th amendment were extremely clear that they didn't want the count to be in any way based on the status of people, citizen, non-citizen, various states of freedom or wealth. Anything. It says explicitly that apportionment ...
August 7, 2025 at 3:57 PM
2/ made this more clear and expanded it since the authors of the 14th amendment were extremely clear that they didn't want the count to be in any way based on the status of people, citizen, non-citizen, various states of freedom or wealth. Anything. It says explicitly that apportionment ...