Did the SC AG walk over Barret's decision?
How should this play out?
All I can see is that she didn't allow the case to go forward.
Students wanted no vax mandate. My question would be, why want the mandate lifted if they could use another exemption? Thrust of suit was lift the mandate, IMO.
Maybe SC decided to push the issue, now. Which SCJ is responsible for SC? Vax proponents would have to go to the SC for a reinstatement of the UofSC vax mandate, wouldn't they?
Opposite of what Barret ruled on. How's that look if the ruling SCJ for the SC district let's it go forward?
Maybe nothing, Maybe just a coincidence.
I don't think it's black people being pushed in our faces. I think it's a oampaign to allow incompetents of any race an excuse to be able to participate in areas they're not capable in.
Any competent person, white or not is a target. Ben Carson, for example.
If the lid on the bullshit blows, people will demand competency at the decision making level so it doesn't happen again. The gaslighting now is to sell the narrative that equitable distribution of races is more important than competency.
Point has to be reached, I think, that the peeps finally give up on the idea of having injustices corrected by the court system.
I think (too) many still believe in equal protection under the law, and that the little guy can prevail in court when blackletter law is on his side.
Gut punch territory, I think. If the veil comes off the justice fable, people will resort to other means of correcting the paradigm. Peaceful, though, like strikes and protests (a la France).