/explore
|
You are here 
|
firevlondon.com | ||
| | | | |
skwawkbox.org
|
|
| | | | | 'Fight like our familes' lives depend on it - because they do' - a string of brilliant, fiery speeches from leading left figures, including RMT's Eddie Dempsey, Hillsborough Campaign's Sheila Coleman and the Liverpool Community Independents All images/footage © S Walker/Skwawkbox Liverpool saw a huge turnout for yesterday's 'Enough is Enough' march and rally against... | |
| | | | |
williamdavies.blog
|
|
| | | | | https://www.youtube.com/embed/o6WZy08QlRI?si=C_OKzcWssMyFAifR This interview with Ash Sarkar covers lots of things, well beyond Elon Musk: the nature of the current conjuncture, crisis or 'vibeshift'; the threat of the Trump presidency and authoritarianism; the state of neoliberalism; the challenges and contradictions confronting the Labour government; and more. | |
| | | | |
www.calculatedriskblog.com
|
|
| | | | | A top ranked economics and finance blog with a focus on the housing market | |
| | | | |
www.law.cornell.edu
|
|
| | | [AI summary] The text presents a legal analysis of the constitutionality of the independent counsel statute, focusing on the separation of powers and executive authority. The Supreme Court examines whether the statute's provisions, particularly the 'good cause' removal standard and the special court's appointment authority, violate the President's constitutional duty to ensure the faithful execution of the laws. The Court considers precedents such as *Humphrey's Executor* and *Wiener* to determine whether the independent counsel, an inferior officer, is subject to removal restrictions that impede the President's executive power. The analysis concludes that the statute does not unduly interfere with the President's constitutional obligations, as the 'good cau... | ||
