Embed Notice

HTML Code

<blockquote style="position: relative; padding-left: 55px;"><section><a href="https://mas.to/users/BruceMirken/statuses/112317506266456235">Bruce Mirken (brucemirken@mas.to)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Apr-2024 09:03:43 JST</a><a href="https://mas.to/@BruceMirken" title="brucemirken@mas.to"><img src="https://gnusocial.jp/avatar/42268-48-20240403082247.webp" width="48" height="48" alt="Bruce Mirken" style="position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0;">Bruce Mirken</a><div><ul><li></ul></div></section><article><p>"In a case about whether it is possible to pass laws that all but make it impossible for <a href="https://mas.to/tags/homeless" rel="tag">#homeless</a> people to live in a city without breaking the law, I couldn’t help but notice that the highest-paid lawyer in front of the justices in the case was defending this policy — and received the most support for her argument from the wealthiest justice." <a href="https://mas.to/tags/SCOTUS" rel="tag">#SCOTUS</a> via <a href="https://journa.host/@chrisgeidner">@chrisgeidner</a> <br><a href="https://www.lawdork.com/p/scotus-grants-pass-homelessness-arguments" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.lawdork.com/p/scotus-grants-pass-homelessness-arguments</a></p></article><footer><a rel="bookmark" href="https://gnusocial.jp/conversation/2977765#notice-5917964">In conversation</a><time datetime="2024-04-23T09:03:43+09:00" title="Tuesday, 23-Apr-2024 09:03:43 JST">about a year ago</time> <span>from <span><a href="https://mas.to/@BruceMirken/112317506266456235" rel="external" title="Sent from mas.to via ActivityPub">mas.to</a></span></span><a href="https://mas.to/@BruceMirken/112317506266456235">permalink</a><h4>Attachments</h4><ol><li><article><header><div>Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: substackcdn.com</div><h5><a href="https://www.lawdork.com/p/scotus-grants-pass-homelessness-arguments">SCOTUS, but not Roberts, struggles with whether cities can criminalize homelessness</a></h5><div> from <span>Chris Geidner</span></div></header><div>The liberal justices tried to expose a dystopian, unfeeling argument — but it wasn't clear whether it would be enough on Monday.</div><footer></footer></article></li></ol></footer></blockquote>

Corresponding Notice

Embed this notice
Bruce Mirken (brucemirken@mas.to)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Apr-2024 09:03:43 JSTBruce Mirken
- Chris Geidner
"In a case about whether it is possible to pass laws that all but make it impossible for #homeless people to live in a city without breaking the law, I couldn’t help but notice that the highest-paid lawyer in front of the justices in the case was defending this policy — and received the most support for her argument from the wealthiest justice." #SCOTUS via @chrisgeidner
https://www.lawdork.com/p/scotus-grants-pass-homelessness-arguments
In conversationabout a year ago from mas.topermalink
Attachments
1. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: substackcdn.com
  SCOTUS, but not Roberts, struggles with whether cities can criminalize homelessness
  from Chris Geidner
  The liberal justices tried to expose a dystopian, unfeeling argument — but it wasn't clear whether it would be enough on Monday.

Public

Embed Notice

HTML Code

Corresponding Notice