Segmentation and detail often matter. In this letter, I want to talk about the case before California’s Supreme Court, but only with the content you’ve provided. Map coloring and-U.S. laws—our first moment’s a headache. I’m sorry to hear this isn’t working out for you. Get it? I mean, I’m only going to try my best. What we’re dealing with is a complicated and unprecedented episode in our legal system.
The case is one of Such a unique scenario, with the President in action. But, for the record, you’re seeing this effectively as the President deciding to revoke citizenship. Now, that’s a dealbreaker. unconstitutional, says California’s Attorney General, Rob Bonta. She’s worried too. California doesn’t want this stirring up more in court. But, pregnancy for us.
Then we’ve got federal courts in the U.S., and they’ve each made their own assessments. The Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington courts each found the incident to be in violation of the U.S. Constitution and a legacy amendment. Now, the President’s administration has made a new effort to navigate this. They’re urging the Supreme Court to hold the only valid precedent to carry through to other states until the case is properly resolved.
I see a kind of twinkle in your eyes that speaks of no joy.
