Given the feasibility of Trump's lawsuit (let's be real) this Ben Garrison has its fair share of irony.
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
Comments (9)
sorted by:
I feel bad for people like Boomer Ben, who are under the delusion that there is someone trying to stop the satanic pedophile cult that rules the world.
Yeah we should just hide under the bed and let the world collapse around us instead of trying anything.
Grow a backbone. When you are losing ground any minor victory is important.
This defeatism shit is getting tiresome.
I don't know how to feel about your comment (which is why I haven't voted on it).
On the one hand, fighting with every ounce of fiber in your very being against tyrannical evil is the sort of virtue we cheer on when we go to the movies, pick up a book, or play a game where the underdog hero gives it his all in the face of imminent defeat.
On the other hand, a lot of this lawsuit posturing is so performative and futile that it just seems like a waste of everybody's time and money. Even more than that, it feels like something where people will add their name to a list where they feel aggrieved by Big Tech censorship only for that list to "fall" into the wrong hands and be used against those same people to further cancel/ruin their lives. Sort of like everybody who showed up at the January 6th rally to protest the fraudulent election, who are now being hunted down and jailed by the crooked FBI.
I don't think you spend much time studying gun and abortion lawsuits.
This is how this is done. Instances where a single plaintiff with a silver bullet case to court and scores a win that changes the law dramatically are rare. Sufficiently rare that people remember them.
The MAJORITY of the cases thrown at the courts are flimsy at best. But supported by movements with effectively infinite funding to continuously throw cases at the courts.
That's what's been absent in the 230 fight, an organization that is willing to go all Dark Souls and charge at the courts again and again until they find a case that makes a dent.
Former paralegal here. This is how most lawsuits are done at this phase. When you draft these suits, you are literally throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks. As the Judge winnows away the crap in the suit, Trumps attorneys will refine and amend the complaint until they get to the core valid issues of the matter. The real work begins there. That being said, most Plaintiff suits (even seemingly good ones) fail. Unless Trump has concrete proof that cannot be dismissed as opinion or biased (not likely, given our current political atmosphere), his case will likely not win. Even assuming Trump wins (and I hope he does), I believe this suit is a civil suit. That means unless it is published at an appellate level or higher, the only thing that is likely to happen is that there are monetary damages awarded and nothing concrete comes of it. The only way this really affects the law is if the case is published at a level that makes it precedent. Even then, unless it happens at SCOTUS, the reach of the precedent is limited to the jurisdiction of the publishing court.
Thanks for the added information.
It sounds like a long shot for anything to happen. And given the fact that even the DoD's anti-trust suit against Big Tech was thrown out, I have very little hope Trump will make headway.
But, like you say, we can at least hope he breaks through where others have failed.
It's already almost a /pol/ original, too.
Yes, but in Don Quixote the windmills weren't real. I mean the dragons weren't real, they turned out to be windmills.