NOTHING!!
Maxine Waters Verified account @RepMaxineWaters
2:56 PM - 23 Jun 2019
Trump, you get no credit for so-called stopping the strike against Iran. Why was the unmanned drone in Iran's airspace? Why the surveillance? Don't provoke and then pretend innocence.
Back later......
An unusual configuration of justices from both ideological wings of the Supreme Court came together Monday to strike down provisions in federal law denying federal registration to trademarks deemed “immoral” or “scandalous.”
The decision, which won the full backing of six of the justices, was the second time in two years that the high court knocked out a portion of federal trademark law as a violation of free speech rights.
Writing for the court’s majority, Justice Elena Kagan said the law ran afoul of the First Amendment rights of artist Erik Brunetti, who sought trademark protection for a clothing line called “FUCT.”
At arguments in the case in April, the justices and litigants carefully avoided around the swear word that is a homophone for Brunetti’s proposed trademark, with his attorney Malcolm Stewart noting that the trademark office found that many people would view the mark as “the equivalent of the profane past participle form of a well-known word of profanity and perhaps the paradigmatic word of profanity in our language.”
Kagan’s opinion was fully endorsed by liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as well as all the court’s Republican appointees, save for Chief Justice John Roberts.
But Breyer and Sotomayor seemed particularly concerned that the ruling Monday could lead to a proliferation of clothing and other merchandise emblazoned with racial epithets.
While Justice Samuel Alito joined the majority, he also wrote separately to say he saw no real value in Brunetti’s “FUCT” mark and would find a ban on it constitutional if more narrowly written.
“The term suggested by that mark is not needed to express any idea and, in fact, as commonly used today, generally signifies nothing except emotion and a severely limited vocabulary,” he wrote. “The registration of such marks serves only to further coarsen our popular culture. But we are not legislators and cannot substitute a new statute for the one now in force.”
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/24/supreme-court-ban-scandalous-immoral-trademarks-1378321