Posted on 04/18/2021 1:40:09 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
If this case goes to the SCOTUS, does anyone have any doubt that Chief Justice Roberts will side with the Progressives?
I don’t.
All of San Francisco wants someone to subsidize them to live there.
They think it’s an entitlement for people as cool as they are.
Who would want to retire in San Francisco anyway? It’s a lost city.
advice to SF slumlords
find another occupation
Yep I wonder. John Roberts has gone liberal on us, on a number of cases.
I wonder if John Roberts likes to be something of a swing vote, as opposed to being firmly lined up with the conservative bloc?
Then again, maybe he’s being blackmailed and we don’t know it.
Some contortions, such as calling the Obamacare penalty a tax, and if it’s a tax, that makes Obamacare constitutional, seem out of bounds.
And fratboy and RBG redux are just along for the ride.
Are politicians in a contest these days to prove who can come up with the stupidest laws?
What happens if Pakdel sells that property?
New owner, lease with old owner doesn’t exist anymore.
After all the hysteria and incivil behavior conservatives dealt with for Kavanaugh. He was already damaged goods even then, hardwired for Globalism, courtesy of the Bushies.
I don’t know what to say about Judge Amy.
Except for this: Mitch McConnell most likely selected the judicial nominees who told him “Yes. If need be, yes, I would vote to convict President Donald Trump if it was meant to ‘maintain the overall peace of American Society.”
THAT may be the main reason Mitch was able to get so many judges confirmed so very quickly. Had you ever wondered how he did it, and why he had not been stopped by people like Schumer? I used to wonder. Used to.
Be careful what you vote for.
Given that he was intending to retire in SF, the ordinance and the lower courts are probably doing him a favor. He will likely be thanking them later.
The radical left hates private property and wants to seize it. They can’t do that just yet. For the time being, they’ll have to be content with making it so you can’t use your property - effectively stealing it from you.
The freeze on rents, ordered under Trump, was illegal. The government does not have the right to invalidate the terms of a valid contract between two parties.
This action by SF is illegal, for the same reason.
When they actually do take private property, few will notice, because we’re almost there now.
Zoning is taking.
“No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed.”
Article I, Section 9
The State of California is legally a creation of the federal government.
Why would anyone want to retire in San Francisco?
Isn’t that the city with the poop alerts so citizens don’t step in human excrement?
And Pelosi has a mansion there? A people are moving out in droves? Blue State hellhole in progress...
My sister basically had to buy her SF home twice — once to buy it from the previous owner and a second time to buy out a basement renter whom she took on in order to help pay for the first purchase.
(And she still votes Marxist, for which she gets no sympathy from me over suffering from policies imposed by the very people she voted for.)
I’m retired and spending down.
My financial assets will wind up in my septic tank.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.