Chomper Higgot

He doesn’t, he just needs to obey the law.

A more pragmatic approach would have been to simply change the name of the JCPOA to the ‘Trump Deal’ and leave it in place. But that would have denied the dullard the opportunity to demonstrate everything he touches dies.

A squabbling rabble, removing the whip and thereby losing 20% of their MPs in the wake of Lowe challenging ‘messiah’ Farage. And they would have you believe they are a Government in waiting.

Don’t worry, payback is coming.

You do understand the difference between the Constitution and Laws? I think most who attended Civics class do.

It’ll wind up in court.

Nevertheless, once in the U.S. the individual has rights protected by the Constitution, amongst which are those under the 1st Amendment and the right to justice. Much hangs on the term ‘possible illegal behavior’.

Putin agrees.

I think you’ll find the main reason is UK law with the ECHR ruling on a very small number of cases. Even if the UK were to leave the ECHR, which is highly unlikely, the UK would still be bound by other international treaties to which it is a signatory, example the UN Conventions on human rights and specifically that relating to refugees and asylum.

All actions by Government age vies are subject to the Constitution, the law and may be challenged in court. The U.S. is not yet a dictatorship.

Greenland’s resources, not America’s, not Trump’s not those of any of the billionaires he works for.

It would look a lot like a green light to empire building.

Seems entirely reasonable.

There is no clause in the Constitution denying rights on the basis of legality or otherwise of residence.

Patently false: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/297/

The Constitution only withholds two rights from non citizens, the right to vote and the right to hold Federal Government Office, all other rights under the constitution are held by all person within the U.S. and its jurisdiction. There are historical examples of these rights being withheld from certain groups, usually on the basis of race. Those being some of the most shameful episodes in the abuse of Government power So yes, foreign students do have the rights of freedom of speech and freedom of association under the Constitution, but also infringement of constitutional rights is and always has been part of the abuse of Government power. Court cases will undoubtedly follow.

Come back and tell us if you ever find any evidence to support your loaded curiosity.

It seems Rishi is full of things he never did when he had the chance.

AKA inflation.

Or, there’s a bunch of parents who fear their children can’t compete unless they receive privileged access to small class sizes, and all those other ‘special needs students’ often used as examples of those who will suffer due to the closure of already financially struggling schools.

I was making a sarcastic observation. The carbon impacts of production are reduced per unit produced by the economies of scale. The carbon impact of the Internal Combustion Engine increases per unit produced.

I see you’ve grasped the rudiments of probability. So how is the closure of a few failing private schools impact the next generation’s ‘brightest prospects’?

You do understand tariffs are taxes? Keep an eye on your Social Security.

On the basis of probability they exist in the highest numbers amongst the students in State schools.

Except: https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-clean-energy-was-top-driver-of-chinas-economic-growth-in-2023/