Chomper Higgot

Now you are assuming the appeals court and eventually the SCOTUS agrees with the DOJ filing. The ruling handed down by the US Court of International Trade is replete with legal precedence, case law and SCOTUS rulings. It is folly to dismiss it on the basis of what the administration claims.

Can you provide text within the appeals court ruling that substantiates the claim you made:

There’s a small matter of the Constitution, separation of powers and the rule of law. Trump promising to do things beyond the power of the Presidency in his election campaign does not give him the power to do things beyond the power of the Presidency. The President has his powers within the purview of the Presidency and the Courts have theirs. The fact that the particular court is titled ‘Inited States Court of International Trade’ is a clue to what the court’s purview is. I recommend adding the history of the United States Court of International Trade along with the Constitution of the United States to your reading list. If after that you have some spare time, the courts actual ruling is an informative read.

Yes. Here it is. Feel free to point out errors in my post you replied to: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/court-of-international-trade-trump-tariffs-illegal.pdf

Yet more ill informed nonsense.

Moreover, the original court ruling is stuffed full of legal precedents and SCOTUS case rulings that demonstrate the President is overstepping his authority.

You should perhaps ask those who claim buy-to-let is a free market what they mean by that claim. I do not advocate a ‘free for all market’ in housing or anywhere else.

Moreover, private equity and institutional investors are moving into the buy to let market. Its a perfect example of ordinary working people in competition with the rich for limited resources. https://www.estatesgazette.co.uk/legal/the-rise-of-private-equity-in-the-rental-sector/

It’s always the immigrants with Jonny.

The necessity of Awaab’s law included in the Rebters Rights Act is a direct result of the current market and precisely why regulation is necessary.

Who said anything about Catholics?

It’s a rigged market. Definitely not the ‘free market’ some landlords would have us believe.

I think rent controls a a good idea. Doing business with unfit assets is the landlord’s problem, not that of their tenants.

Yes Jonny, improving their assets. As I presume you are a responsible landlord, I’m sure you support the introduction of the renters rights act and I particular the inclusion of ‘Awaab’s Law’ that will remove the incentive unscrupulous landlords have to undercut responsible landlords like yourself by renting out unsafe properties to their tenants. https://www.housing.org.uk/resources/awaabs-law/

What by applying the same building standard to all new built housing regardless of whether for private purchase or buy to let?

I think Christianity hold that distinction .

Note to Americans who are overseas: You’re not in Kansas anymore.

It wasn’t me who introduced the wildly irrelevant 2nd amendment to this thread. look closer to home for the stupid usual nonsense.

So let’s put that to the test: If ‘those [STEM students] aren’t the one’s anyone is talking about’ does the halt to new student visa interviews and social media vetting exclude applicants to STEM program? Or is your claim nobody is talking about those [STEM] students a fabrication of your own misunderstanding of what the Trump administration are doing?

A very odd thing to say in this particular thread. Are we now to expect Trump to demand Americans be afforded the right to bear arms while abroad and sanctions against any Government that denies that ‘right’?

Oh

It’s not an entirely free market. The Renters’ Rights Bill addresses many of the problems of rent rate fixing/gouging. A piece of legislation that, when it comes into force later this year, will positively help millions of working class tenants across the UK. Adding local rent controls to that legislation would be a very effective means to prevent landlords passing the costs of improving their assets on to their tenants.

Which Americans have had their free speech restricted in the UK by PM Starmer?

No it’s not a mistype. King Canute* ordered the tide not to rise. https://blogs.bl.uk/digitisedmanuscripts/2016/11/turning-the-tide.html *edited by Elwood to use the normal English spelling and avoid offense.

Jonny, the subject of the thread is not ‘rape gangs. As PM Starmer doesn’t send anyone to prison, that’s the job of the courts, and they aren’t imprisoning anyone who is a political opponent of the PM or for criticism of the Government’s policies. Nothing Yaxley Lennon has to say is anything to ‘go by’, he’s nothing more than a habitual law breaker.