US citizens have an unequivocal right to re-enter the county regardless of where they have been, how they returned, how long they were gone, or what they were doing. This was already determined by the Supreme Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898).
halcyoncmdr
joined 7 months ago
He's a US Citizen. Legally they cannot deny him entry into the country.
Central to these protections is the absolute right of a U.S. citizen to return to their country. This right is unequivocal. No matter where an individual has traveled, the duration of their absence, or their personal or legal background, a U.S. citizen cannot be denied entry into the United States. This principle is supported by both statutory and constitutional law. A landmark Supreme Court case, United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), established that citizenship includes the right to reenter the nation. Unlike lawful permanent residents or visa holders, U.S. citizens are exempt from admissibility criteria. Consequently, even if a U.S. citizen lacks proper documentation or is subject to further questioning, the government is obligated to permit their entry once their citizenship is verified.
It's always the bear.
I've noticed the same in recent years with Star Trek and the far right as well.
I don't know how they can possibly miss that the Federation is functionally a post-scarcity socialist utopia.
On the other hand... the Ferengi are essentially a direct replica of the modern US, including the far right's clear motive to try and force women back to subservience. I'm sure they'd love to be able to force them to be naked all the time while they're at it.
It's obvious many of the species in the ST universe were extreme caricatures of specific regions/countries from real life, and the Ferengi were based on the US... But I don't think they expected the caricature to so directly become the reality.
To be fair, can anyone understand The Silmarillion? The way it is written is hard even when you are literate.
It's not like Pokemon's designs are unique either.
They didn't go that route because they also did the same shit. And that definitely wouldn't be a viable defense in court.
For a little bit. They figured it's a one-off... And so far they e been correct.
But every bullshit denial could mean another.
That didn't address my point.
Is public video recording considered a 4th amendment violation?
Because that's what the Flock cameras do.
The rest of what makes Flock... is processing after the fact. And that analysis is effectively the same as what any social media or advertising company does when they build a profile on you. Actually basically any tech company nowadays is making a profile for you and attaching it to whatever data they can get their hands on, and usually selling access to their data on you as well. And those are clearly considered legal. Whether they should be is a different topic.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Not sure public video recording amounts to a search and seizure. Is there case precedent establishing specifically that?
Yeah the red dyed stuff is bad for them, specifically the dye.
You don't need to get special food though either. Some simple sugar water (watered down simple syrup) is all they need. 1/4 Cup of sugar into 1 Cup water and boil it for a minute. Let it cool down and you can store it in the fridge for a few days if your hummers are as voracious as ours and you want to make extra at a time.
So I finally let my Android Auto update from Google Assistant to Gemini, which it's been wanting for months.
First thing I did was prompt it to play a specific artist, just like I do at least once a week since it forces me to use the voice activation instead of the on screen keyboard, even when there are passengers that can type. It responded saying it is not capable of playing music at all. Wtf.
So I then rephrase and tell it to play the artist on YouTube Music... And it does so, but doesn't get the artist even close to correct. I had to prompt it 5 times with varying emphasis to get it to finally get it right.
So literally the first thing it did wa like to me... and then it worked correctly less than 20% of the time... So much better than the Assistant it replaced that never gave me a problem. Totally better.