We knew this back with the Central Park Six, We knew this back when his father was sued for refusing to rent to black families. We've known this for decades.
It will make it to SCOTUS where a 5-4 decision will say that it's ok.
More reason why voting Democrat matters so much because those 4? Dem appointed.
You're aware that Democrats directly gave us three of those Republican SCOTUS justices, right?
5-4 decision
I wouldn't give it more than 6-3. Isn't there 6 bigots on the big bench, or is one a wildcat?
The judge quoted many of Trump’s comments against immigrants of color, including the time he railed against people coming to the U.S. from “shithole countries” or when he claimed Haitians are “poisoning the blood” of our country. In his second term as president, Trump attacked Somali Americansand accused them of adding “nothing” to the country, and oversaw violent immigration crackdowns across the country, particularly in Minnesota.
Marbley also highlighted Trump and Vance’s made-up accusation that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating people’s pet cats and dogs.
“If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m going to do,” Vance said in 2024, which Marbley quoted directly.
“shithole countries”
Which is yet more fucking IRONY from this administration, because A) He learned so much from shithole dictators and B) He is turning the US into a shithole.
The Supreme Court already said these exact Trump comments weren't racist in the TPS case and that was 6-3. And they seem OK with Trump hating immigrants.
But no, Alito said. There’s a perfectly nonracial explanation for all of the dog whistles. “None of the cited statements by either the President or the Secretary was overtly racial, and in substance all expressed policy views that could rest on race-neutral justifications.” In other words, the Trump administration hates all types of immigration and wanted to roll back the TPS system as a whole; therefore, it couldn’t have acted racially in its decision. On top of that, the court said that it’s pretty much just a coincidence that the majority of TPS countries are predominantly nonwhite. That’s not the administration’s fault; it’s because “the great majority of countries granted TPS have ranked among the poorest nations of the world, and no European nation falls into that category.” The stability (and therefore superiority) of European nations is evidence to be used against any argument that the Trump administration was unfairly motivated by illegal racial animus.
None were overtly racial. Covert racism is fine.
The direction they're going in is that overt racism is now fine, in addition to covert racism. As long as there's also some other non-racial parallel reasoning.
Hurting minorities: There's a totally non-racist reason
Helping minorities: Unacceptable consideration of race/Racist against white people
I think you meant "reasoning".
Maybe the administration just misunderstood the meaning and the mandate of the White house.
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News