IHeartBadCode

You feel Florida being able to unilaterally dictate validity of state documents is okay?

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

— Article IV Section 1 US Constitution

[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes

— Article I Section 8 Clause 3 US Constitution

Florida doesn't seem to have authority to just unilaterally dictate these things. It would seem that they must work with Congress to implement such regulation. The entire point the framers of the Constitution placed on the State system in Article IV of the Constitution is to:

1. Protect their rights to regulate their citizens
2. Prevent the abuse of them regulating other State citizens.

Florida's move to attempt to apply some pressure to citizens from other states is a direct violation of the core ethos that the framers of this nation wanted to have. If Florida wants to regulate Floridians into a fine mushy pulp, that is Florida's prerogative. Additionally, if Florida wants to prosecute someone from another State for violation of a law that Florida has, that's fine too. Where the line is crossed is when in the carriage of enforcing that law, it requires Florida to openly question another State's issuing documents. That is the violation.

Florida MUST work with Congress to implement the requirements for this framework that they have set up to function. Florida has not done so, they have forgone coming to the table to discuss the issue with the various States and decided to act in a unilateral manner. I get they want to clamp down on immigration, they must do so according to the laws that are set forth and must do so in good faith with the other States. This is neither.

The would still need a reason to stop

The reason to stop comes up only if your lawyer brings it up. A public defender isn't going to bring it up because it requires being able to build enough doubt to have the judge inquiry. And a judge is going to be less favorable in giving a benefit of the doubt for a public defender. If you cannot afford a lawyer, you're less likely to afford the filing should the court go down that road of police inquiry.

This is why most people who go with public defenders just go with simple bench arranged plea deals. The vast majority of people pulled over aren't going to have the resources to challenge this. That's the entire point.

29 USC § 203 (m)(1) authorizes 29 CFR § 531.34. The current rule making from the Secretary of Labor (q) is as:

Scrip, tokens, credit cards, “dope checks,” coupons, and similar devices are not proper mediums of payment under the Act.

This all is found in the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, public law Pub. L. 75-718

@elonjet@mastodon.social for those wondering.

do { alert("Everything is fine!"); } while ( 1 == 1 );

I'll take my six figure salary now.

For those interested. This is similar to Aduhelm in that it is an amyloid binding drug. Amyloids proteins have long been thought to be central to Alzheimer's disease since it was first described by Dr. Alois Alzheimer in 1906, where during his autopsy of a 50-year who died while suffering memory loss, disorientation, and other classical symptoms of the disease noticed "senile plaque" had accumulated on the brain which is usually found in much older patients. In the 1980s chemical analysis of the plaque indicated that it was made of beta-amyloids and from there we've been attempting to target that in order to prevent Alzheimer's disease.

The statement that the drug "will" slow Alzheimer's is editorial so to say. After their third phase trail, the results were sobering.

27% decrease in the rate of progression for patients treated with Leqembi, compared to those receiving a placebo.

Which 27% is still 27%. But this drug is looking to go for a price of $23,000 to $27,000 per year (drug cost alone, infusion and doctor's office visits may shoot this price upward towards $90,000/year). Strangely the article says:

Current rules mean that it’s unlikely to be covered by Medicare.

Which there was Senate hearing where the exact opposite was indicated. Medicaid will likely have the 20% co-pay for patients. That said, for the United States, this drug will be outside of the reach of many not 65 or older.

Additionally, we're still at the nexus of this topic and not knowing full well where to go for the treatment in Alzheimer's. Many competing ideas of the full scope of Alzheimer's disease still exist from tau tangles to neuron degeneration. It's indisputable that beta-amyloids do have a part in Alzheimer's the question remains as to how large a role it plays in mental decline and the low positive outcomes of beta-amyloids has served as fuel for discussion of other ideas. That said, penicillin failed twice in clinical trials, but today nobody would question antibiotic theory, so take the failures with a grain of salt perhaps? But this all does indeed go to show, this area of research is dizzily complex and fluid to say the least.

As for the "first" distinction and that Aduhelm has been FDA approved since 2021. Leqembi is the FIRST to receive the full FDA approval. Aduhelm still operates under the accelerated approval and is still pending a full review. Much like how we had COVID vaccines approved under the accelerated program first and then in 2022 the FDA gave many of them full approval.

It's good this drug has received the first full approval for the treatment of beta-amyloids. But suffice to say, based on the approval material, we still have yet a LONG way to go in Alzheimer's research.

CLOSE THE PLANET! YOU ARE LETTING ALL THE HEAT OUT!!

Now this is some real cities skyline!

Elon can pick a lane about as well as a Tesla.

Society: I accept your terms.

Taylor Taranto, 37, who prosecutors say participated in the Jan. 6, 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol, kept two firearms and hundreds of rounds of ammunition inside a van he had driven cross-country and had been living in, according to a Justice Department motion that seeks to keep him behind bars

Who would of thought that such an upstanding member of society would do such a thing?

Pretty much 99% of the people who were at the Capitol that day shouldn’t still be walking around in broad daylight.

Nobody wants to be the “bad guy” who just tosses the lot into jail. They want to still present this “even handed” approach. But truth is, every fucker that got off with a slap on the wrist, they’re absolutely going to go for round two. And they’re going to keep going round after round until they’ve killed every last person they disagree with or the justice system locks them away as the traitors to the United States they are.

If this story didn’t convince anyone of that, nothing will.