|
mawarannahr posted:This doesn't really tell me how forced flights will help more than just hiring more people. The flights take them back to their home vs. just turning them around at the border. These were people who were being deported anyway and flying people home is not a new policy. The new policy is that the U.S. will start flying Mexican citizens back instead of making them turn around and walk to a border city in Mexico for Mexican officials to deal with. In exchange, Mexico is pledging to devote more resources to preventing busses or other mass groups from traveling through the country up to the American border. quote:Administration officials have been poring over various options for months, but Biden has made no decision on how to proceed with any executive actions. White House aides have seen little immediate urgency for the president to take any action, considering the number of illegal border crossings has declined from a record high of 250,000 in December as Mexican officials have stepped up their enforcement efforts. The border bill provision that let him "shut down the border" is a different thing and not related to the decision of flights vs. turn away at border. mawarannahr posted:The bolded part is obvious bullshit from officials in Mexico Why do you think Mexico would rather people mass in border cities for them to deal with vs. have someone else pay for flights home for them? Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 16:44 on Apr 30, 2024 |
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 16:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 10:30 |
|
|
mawarannahr posted:The looming threat of "executive action" where he said he would use "the emergency authority to shut down the border until it could get back under control. If that bill were the law today, I’d shut down the border right now and fix it quickly" is also pretty sickening and sounds exactly like "shut it down until we've got it figured out." Yes, that part would actually be a broken campaign promise if it applies to certain asylum claims (which it almost certainly will), but the border bill and potential executive action aren't related to the decision to fly people vs. turn away if they are Mexican citizens. That is a decision regarding people already getting deported and not choosing whether they will be deported or not. They also say they have no idea what to do with executive action and don't have any rush because the huge surge from last year has been reduced. quote:Administration officials have been poring over various options for months, but Biden has made no decision on how to proceed with any executive actions. White House aides have seen little immediate urgency for the president to take any action, considering the number of illegal border crossings has declined from a record high of 250,000 in December as Mexican officials have stepped up their enforcement efforts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 16:57
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/kadiagoba/status/1785313292904259854 Dems will save Johnson, which is both correct and unfortunately the best thing for the GOP caucus, who now get to scream about Rino Mike without the public embarrassment of another prolonged leadership quagmire. zoux fucked around with this message at 17:07 on Apr 30, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 17:00
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:This doesn't really tell me how forced flights will help more than just hiring more people. "Forced flights" aren't new at all, though. How else did you think the US deports people who have been caught illegally crossing the border? It's not some special thing that only Trump would do. As for hiring more people, that requires Congress to act to do something about the immigration system before it collapses entirely, and fat chance of that if the Dems can't get a solid, healthy majority. And just to be clear here, simply ignoring immigration laws altogether and throwing the borders wide open is not a popular position even among Democrats. Dems want to expand legal immigration and create a path to citizenship for the undocumented immigrants who have already established lives here. But being pro-immigration or against harsh treatment of illegal immigrants doesn't mean thinking that we shouldn't have border policies or border enforcement. Will it make him unpopular? Probably not! The poll numbers on illegal immigration have been dire the last few months. Gallup polls have found that immigration is currently voters' top priority and has been for three straight months. And while this is of course most pronounced among Republicans, both independents and Democrats have seen a spike in how many people are ranking immigration as their top priority. Meanwhile, ABC/Ipsos found that Biden's approval rating on immigration is the lowest of any president since they started asking the question back in 2004. And both Marquette University and ABC/Ipsos have found that Americans are substantially more likely to think Trump is better suited for handling border issues. Monmouth found that a huge majority of voters see illegal immigration as a serious problem, and a majority see it as a very serious problem, with even Dems being far more concerned about it than they were in 2019, and support for a US-Mexico border wall being higher now than at any other point in the last decade. The people have spoken, and they loving love xenophobia. Realistically, it's probably mostly the media's fault for buying into right-wing framing, even as the right has continued to block immigration reform and allowed the border situation to substantially worsen. But none of these numbers suggest we're in an environment where bog-standard border enforcement is suddenly going to become wildly unpopular.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 17:15
|
|
|
I am going to guess passage of the recent Ukraine aid and other packages included negotiations between the Democrats and Mike Johnson that included an agreement to prop him up in a motion to vacate scenario.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 17:16
|
|
|
That's not a guess, that's been the whole reason the packages made it to the floor in the first place. Dem leadership has been openly saying they'd only save Johnson if he brought the aid bills to a vote.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 17:34
|
|
|
The DEA really missed the boat by not proposing the rescheduling of marijuana on 4/20. Would it have killed them to make that announcement 10 days earlier?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 18:29
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:And also like, while we here on this forum presumably support just not having borders and a world wide Schengen Zone this is a incredibly niche and minority position among Americans at large. Even under NAFTA with a skilled trade like a STEM degree its still a massive pain to go to the US for work. I think this was touched on during a previous immigration chat, but as busted as the US system is, I think it's still easier to get into the US compared to Australia/EU/etc if you have no preexisting ties?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 18:44
|
|
|
Zapp Brannigan posted:The DEA really missed the boat by not proposing the rescheduling of marijuana on 4/20. Would it have killed them to make that announcement 10 days earlier? And this is how I learned the historic news that after 50 years of trying, weed has been rescheduled.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 18:47
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:And this is how I learned the historic news that after 50 years of trying, weed has been rescheduled. Dark Brandon smokes weed every day
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 18:49
|
|
|
Finally, Biden has ceased giving a hot gay gently caress what Congress says
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 18:49
|
|
|
I learned that weed was rescheduled with a 4/20 joke and found out that Osama was killed with a terrible "Where's Waldo?" image made in MSpaint that just said, "Found him" before actually reading the real news either time. Thank you SA.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 18:56
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Dark Brandon smokes weed every day It's scheduled III now, so technically Dark Brandon smokes weed every scientific study, with a doctor's prescription, at a registered pharmacy/vendor, or to treat a diagnosed medical condition. Everyday would be recreational legalization from Congress.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:08
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I learned that weed was rescheduled with a 4/20 joke and found out that Osama was killed with a terrible "Where's Waldo?" image made in MSpaint that just said, "Found him" before actually reading the real news either time. SA is the proto-Twitter
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:09
|
|
|
I learned of the rescheduling through a missive solemnly delivered by dark messengers
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:10
|
|
|
Actual article since nobody has posted it yet. Shouldn't the AP style guide say, "an historic shift" instead of "a historic" in the headline? https://x.com/AP/status/1785355350721376726
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:17
|
|
|
"An historic" is horseshit and should never be allowed
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:19
|
|
|
I'm just waiting for Trump/Abbott/Desantis to claim this is a liberal agenda to do...something. Trump won't be until much later today, of course, being in court and all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:19
|
|
|
Tiny Timbs posted:"An historic" is horseshit and should never be allowed Apparently, the AP made "a historic" an official part of their style guide, but only when addressing American audiences. You can use either for international audiences. That just makes more ambiguity AP. Pick a side! https://x.com/APStylebook/status/1338918972574535681
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:25
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Actual article since nobody has posted it yet. Sorry, I was posting from my phone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:26
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Apparently, the AP made "a historic" an official part of their style guide, but only when addressing American audiences. You can use either for international audiences. An horrible standard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:26
|
|
|
Wondering how this will change corporate drug testing policies. A lot of places around me still test and fail you even if you have a prescription.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:33
|
|
|
Actual answer is omit the article. Historic shift.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:34
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:I'm just waiting for Trump/Abbott/Desantis to claim this is a liberal agenda to do...something. Trump won't be until much later today, of course, being in court and all. Rescheduling is mostly for businesses, states, and growers at this point. The feds basically stopped arresting people for simple possession under Obama and Biden pardoned everyone with just a simple possession charge. Under Trump, they charged a few people with pot possession federally, but it was always in addition to other more serious charges. Nobody went to federal prison for just a simple possession charge under Trump either. It should have almost zero impact on federal criminal justice or prison populations. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 19:38 on Apr 30, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:36
|
|
|
Push El Burrito posted:Wondering how this will change corporate drug testing policies. A lot of places around me still test and fail you even if you have a prescription. This still holds true even in states where it's legal, so I wonder if rescheduling will change this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:42
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:This still holds true even in states where it's legal, so I wonder if rescheduling will change this. Rescheduling won't make it illegal to fire you for failing a drug test in private industry unless your state has a law protecting it. If you are a federal employee, then it will help because federal employees are banned from using schedule I or II drugs while employed. It's not an automatic firing anymore.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:48
|
|
|
Once it is federally legal testing for a drug and rejecting a person who has a prescription would be considered medical discrimination. You would have to offer a reasonable accommodation. So it won't save you if your job involves dangerous or heavy machinery. E: Taking without a prescription is still not protected. Barrel Cactaur fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Apr 30, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:48
|
|
|
Angry_Ed posted:This still holds true even in states where it's legal, so I wonder if rescheduling will change this. Yeah I’m not sure why it would. It’s not federally legal now, just rescheduled. And jobs didn’t have to test for it to begin with, so if they do for whatever reason then I would guess they’ll keep doing it. Mine stopped a long time ago and I think the trend is toward companies rightfully not giving a gently caress, and maybe this will jolt a few places into reexamining their policy, but I don’t think it’ll cause a sweeping change. Barrel Cactaur posted:Once it is federally legal testing for a drug and rejecting a person who has a prescription would be considered medical discrimination. You would have to offer a reasonable accommodation. So it won't save you if your job involves dangerous or heavy machinery. For medical weed yeah but not recreational. You can still be fired for having nicotine in your system in some states. Some have made that illegal, though I doubt you’ll see a groundswell for weed smoker protection. Just a gradual erosion in how many companies actually care. Fork of Unknown Origins fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Apr 30, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:49
|
|
|
Will the weed reschedule allow for growers and dispensaries to use normal bank systems? My state has legal pot and I work in a building that has state tax offices, so pre covid (much less so now) we used to routinely have armed state police hanging out in the halls so that growers could feel safe when they came in to pay their taxes with a bag of cash.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:55
|
|
|
Zachack posted:Will the weed reschedule allow for growers and dispensaries to use normal bank systems? My state has legal pot and I work in a building that has state tax offices, so pre covid (much less so now) we used to routinely have armed state police hanging out in the halls so that growers could feel safe when they came in to pay their taxes with a bag of cash. No, it has to be made fully not illegal at the federal level for that
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 19:57
|
|
|
haveblue posted:No, it has to be made fully not illegal at the federal level for that I am reasonably confident that places selling tylenol with codeine can use regular banks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 20:04
|
|
|
haveblue posted:No, it has to be made fully not illegal at the federal level for that Technically, some can. It's complicated. They can register with the DEA as a schedule III distributor (like ketamine clinics or places that sell anabolic steroids currently do) and get banking protections. It has to have a medical function, though. If you are a purely recreational dispensary, then you won't qualify. They need to pass the marijuana banking reform bill that has been floating in the Senate trying to get enough votes the past year to cover recreational dispensaries.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 20:09
|
|
|
will marijuana rescheduling take it off the dot drug test? if so a lot of people at oil companies are gonna be real happy lol.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 20:09
|
|
|
lobster shirt posted:will marijuana rescheduling take it off the dot drug test? if so a lot of people at oil companies are gonna be real happy lol. It won't be a mandatory firing circumstance anymore, but the DOT can still require pilots, truck drivers, etc. to test clean. This will give them the option to treat it like alcohol or certain other drugs where you can't be under the influence on duty, but you can use it. The DOT has to actively make that decision, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 20:13
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It won't be a mandatory firing circumstance anymore, but the DOT can still require pilots, truck drivers, etc. to test clean. Is there a test for marijuana intoxication? The only tests are for whether you've used it in the past however long, month(s).
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 20:18
|
|
|
Zachack posted:Will the weed reschedule allow for growers and dispensaries to use normal bank systems? My state has legal pot and I work in a building that has state tax offices, so pre covid (much less so now) we used to routinely have armed state police hanging out in the halls so that growers could feel safe when they came in to pay their taxes with a bag of cash. Presumably yes, at least for the medical use places that register for it. Recreational dispensaries are probably still out of luck.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 20:20
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Is there a test for marijuana intoxication? The only tests are for whether you've used it in the past however long, month(s). i think blood tests have a short enough detection window that it can be a good proxy for if someone is actually high but otherwise i dont think so. i also dont the feasibility of requiring blood tests.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 20:26
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Is there a test for marijuana intoxication? The only tests are for whether you've used it in the past however long, month(s). Blood tests can be used to get a good approximation of time, but are probably not practical for determining active impairment. It looks like there is a kind of weed breathalyzer that has been developed. It can't tell if you are actively impaired or measure how much THC is in your system exactly, but it can tell if you have used THC in the last 2-3 hours. https://www.timesunion.com/capitol/article/biotech-company-unveils-marijuana-breathalyzer-18414791.php Either way, I think the DOT will probably require truck drivers to piss clean for a while even if they have the option not to after rescheduling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 20:31
|
|
|
Open question to me is how this helps medical dispensaries in practice. Its moving from Schedule I to Schedule III, so still a controlled substance. Businesses will still have to have a DEA registration to handle it, at least to be ok Federally. DEA, however, doesn't have a registration category that medical dispensaries would qualify for. All the registrations are for hospitals/physicians/wholesalers/etc. The system, as it currently exists, isn't really built for controlled substances (that aren't also regulated as drugs) to be sold to the general public. Could be more in the actual actions as they become public. I'm not finding any first party press releases or actions yet, only early reporting in newspapers from unclear sources.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 20:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 10:30 |
|
|
PharmerBoy posted:Open question to me is how this helps medical dispensaries in practice. Its moving from Schedule I to Schedule III, so still a controlled substance. Businesses will still have to have a DEA registration to handle it, at least to be ok Federally. DEA, however, doesn't have a registration category that medical dispensaries would qualify for. All the registrations are for hospitals/physicians/wholesalers/etc. The system, as it currently exists, isn't really built for controlled substances (that aren't also regulated as drugs) to be sold to the general public. This all falls under "wait and see" - the current action isn't actually a rescheduling, it's the DEA recommending to the White House Office of Management and Budget that it be rescheduled. Then it goes to public comment and then...something else. Presumably, the DEA is either already working on how it would regulate and oversee the existing dispensaries, almost certainly with a grace period for everyone to figure out the new rules. This is uncharted territory for everyone involved.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2024 20:41
|
|