sylvrain

[sylvrain]

Hello loyal subjects

[sylvrain]

*starts licking the dusty-ass walls of your askbox*

BITCH IT'S DIRTY IN THERE WYD

[sylvrain]

[sylvrain]

The cookie dough fandom is dying reblog if you like it wet and raw

[sylvrain]

Getting tired of tumblr, which may turn out to be a temporary feeling

[sylvrain]

I’ve been using ProtonMail for years and still haven’t ever run into anyone else using it

[sylvrain]

[sylvrain]

the seal at the bottom of 瓷器 ciqi/chinese porcelain is handwritten

[sylvrain]

i like how most usernames on discord are already taken so you end up having to put numbers at the end of your name anyway. if only there was already a system in place that allowed people to have the same name but there was something to differentiate them like number discriminators

[sylvrain]

[sylvrain]

NEW AGEEEEEE

[sylvrain]

[sylvrain]

[sylvrain]

@funnier-as-a-system

[sylvrain]

I think one of the funniest things I've heard about the Supreme Court is that they almost always rule in favor of defendants accused of corruption, and it's entirely because "Well... this can't be corruption, people do nice things for us like this all the time, and we're certainly not corrupt!"

If it was really just a sort of self-obliviousness, it'd be funny. But no, they have decided that they're Constitutionally Special God-Kings.

Indeed, in his 2011 report, Roberts strongly implied that any attempt by Congress to ethically constrain the justices would be unconstitutional. The fact that the Code of Conduct applies exclusively to lower court judges, Roberts claimed, “reflects a fundamental difference between the Supreme Court and the other federal courts.”

The Constitution gives Congress the power to create lower federal courts, Roberts argued, and that empowers Congress to help oversee them. The Supreme Court, by contrast, is created by the Constitution itself, and that suggests that Congress has less power to constrain the justices.

Though Roberts wrote that the justices do voluntarily comply with some rules that apply to lower court judges, such as a federal law imposing “financial reporting requirements” on all federal judges, he rather ominously warned that the Supreme Court “has never addressed whether Congress may impose those requirements on the Supreme Court” — leaving the clear impression that his Court might start striking down ethical statutes if Congress insisted that the justices must comply with them.