banner80 to [email protected] • 1 year agoNever tire of winningfedia.ioimagemessage-square124fedilinkarrow-up11.54K
arrow-up11.54KimageNever tire of winningfedia.iobanner80 to [email protected] • 1 year agomessage-square124fedilink
minus-squareKⒶMⒶLⒶ WⒶLZ 2Ⓐ24linkfedilink4•1 year agoyou didn’t need to but you did choose to preface this with “technically” which should have tipped you off that this really isn’t in the same arena.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink4•1 year agoNo, but it is an excuse to share this article about that law. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/15/us/politics/qualified-immunity-supreme-court.html This really means that Harlow v Fitzgerald should be overturned.
you didn’t need to but you did choose to preface this with “technically” which should have tipped you off that this really isn’t in the same arena.
No, but it is an excuse to share this article about that law.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/15/us/politics/qualified-immunity-supreme-court.html
This really means that Harlow v Fitzgerald should be overturned.