Love Begins
Andulka
Three Goblin Art
we're not kids anymore.
shark vs the universe
Jules of Nature
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
ellievsbear
d e v o n
PR's Tumblrdome
@theartofmadeline
noise dept.
Janaina Medeiros
let's talk about Bridgerton tea, my ask is open
⁂
Product Placement
祝日 / Permanent Vacation
tumblr dot com
Monterey Bay Aquarium
No title available
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from Italy
seen from Thailand
seen from Indonesia
seen from Sweden
seen from T1
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Brazil
seen from Malaysia
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@ask-woodward
this is a silly, non-serious ask & roleplay blog
Hello, I am Bob Woodward of the Washington Post. Please feel free to ask questions, whether that be about my job, politics, or a particular case, and check out my esteemed partner, @ask-bernstein
Synthesis
1) E+E—>C
2) metal oxide + water —> base, nonmetal oxide + water —> acid
Decomposition
1) C—> E + E
2) acid —> water + nonmetal oxide, base —> water + metal oxide, carbonate —> carbon dioxide + metal oxide
Combustion (they all make heat/light)
1) E + oxygen —> element oxide
2) hydrocarbon + oxygen —> water + carbon dioxide
Single Replacement
A + BC —> AC + B if A is above B on the Activity Series
Double Replacement
AB + CD —> AD + BC(s) in which one product is always a precipitate
Write a net ionization equation.
Neutralization
HA + BOH —> water + AB
The neutralization reaction is always always the same and simplified because you’re not a caveman
Good boy 🫶
NO NO NO NO NO. BAD DOBBY.
Single Replacement
1) as detailed above
2) A + HOH (water) —> AOH (base) + hydrogen gas, in which only one H of water is replaced
3) A + HB (acid) —> AB + hydrogen gas, in which you ignore my poor letter choice and the metal A replaces alllll the Hs
happy watergate eve everybody remember to leave out some confidential documents for the white house plumbers tonight
happy watergate eve everybody remember to leave out a pack of menthol cigarettes and some matches for Carl Bernstein.
happy watergate eve everybody remember to tap your phone lines and leave out a classical music record for woodward
happy watergate eve remember to set your personal tape recorder to auto-record for Nixon tonight! and somebody pour Ben Bradlee and Katherine Graham a scotch each they’re both gonna need it
happy watergate eve uhhhh remember to leave plenty of incriminating evidence behind in the hotel room after you leave
Happy watergate eve, everyone remember to leave a rental car in the parking garage for months on end
Happy watergate day (oops), everyone remember to breed the wrong hill
Have you seen the news? You should check it out Now More Than Ever.™️
wh???
🥲
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Warning: possible misinformation as I yap from memory
purple = need to review
Facts:
A small explosion, involved with a gambling/racketeering group, triggers a police investigation
Dolly Mapp was suspected of harboring a suspect at her house
Mapp refuses to let investigators in without a warrant
3 hours later, they break in by force
They find someone hiding, though not the suspect
The investigators then search Mapp’s bedroom [no probable cause] and find obscene material, a violation of Ohio’s obscenity statute
Constitutional Rights Involved:
First Amendment: Does the Ohio obscenity statute burden free expression? Is there a First Amendment right to receive (obscene) information?
Fourth Amendment: Can evidence obtained without a warrant or probable cause be used in a case?
Context: Weeks v. US (1914) created the Exclusionary Rule, saying that no, it cannot. Wolf v. Colorado (1949) then incorporated the Fourth Amendment to the states, but not the Exclusionary Rule, deeming it nonfundamental.
During the scotus hearing, there was some confusion if this was a First or Fourth Amendment case.
Decisions
Wolf v Colorado overturned through the Due Process Clause, applying the Exclusionary Rule to the states, since there really is no Fourth Amendment without the rule to enforce it. As a result, Mapp has a significant impact on police behavior.
One concurrence says this is a Fifth Amendment case on self-testifying
One concurrence says this is a First Amendment case, as the Ohio statute is overbroad
This is so attractive.
Judicial Review: the power of the Supreme Court to review actions of the executive and legislative (interpret laws, strike down laws), made by Marbury v. Madison (the one that said it’s the job of the judicial branch to say what the law is)
Writ of Certiorari: officially, it is an order to a lower court to send up a case for review. But think of it more like “oh pleaaase scotus 🥺 look at our case! please take it!! because we address a significant constitutional question or federal courts have made contradictory rulings!!” (although there are some situations outlined by article 3 section 2 where the scotus has to take the case)
What else do you want me to do 🫶
What a good boy. 🥺
Judicial Philosophy
First of all, labels BAD!! Labels do oversimplify, especially in the context of the judicial branch, where judges dabble in a bit of everything. But since they need to make these to make students suffer.
Judicial Restraint and Activism
Judicial restraint is the belief that precedents should be followed (stare decicis) and not overturned, and the judge should keep their personal belief out of decisions, especially given that they are unelected and serve for life (and so, their decisions should reflect the constitution over politics). Judicial activism, on the other hand, is the belief that judges should use their role to ‘legislate from the bench’ and be activists that overturn laws they disagree with. So, the question is, do judges have the right to act as lawmakers?
Strict and Loose Constructionism
Strict constructionism is a philosophy in which law is purely interpreted off the text given. The denotation at the relevant time period. Strict constructionist judges are like Santa. They don’t exist. They’re like bring a 3x5 foot index card to class because your teacher never specified inches. Similar to it, though, is textualism, which is interpreting based off of the text and common sense meaning for any gaps. Loose constructionism, on the other hand, uses surrounding context to interpret the law. Examples of it are deriving the right to privacy out of the fourth amendment.
Living and Originalism
These exist but I won’t spend time on them because I’ve done a whole ass other project on them 👍
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Warning: possible misinformation as I yap from memory
purple = need to review
Facts:
A small explosion, involved with a gambling/racketeering group, triggers a police investigation
Dolly Mapp was suspected of harboring a suspect at her house
Mapp refuses to let investigators in without a warrant
3 hours later, they break in by force
They find someone hiding, though not the suspect
The investigators then search Mapp’s bedroom [no probable cause] and find obscene material, a violation of Ohio’s obscenity statute
Constitutional Rights Involved:
First Amendment: Does the Ohio obscenity statute burden free expression? Is there a First Amendment right to receive (obscene) information?
Fourth Amendment: Can evidence obtained without a warrant or probable cause be used in a case?
Context: Weeks v. US (1914) created the Exclusionary Rule, saying that no, it cannot. Wolf v. Colorado (1949) then incorporated the Fourth Amendment to the states, but not the Exclusionary Rule, deeming it nonfundamental.
During the scotus hearing, there was some confusion if this was a First or Fourth Amendment case.
Decisions
Wolf v Colorado overturned through the Due Process Clause, applying the Exclusionary Rule to the states, since there really is no Fourth Amendment without the rule to enforce it. As a result, Mapp has a significant impact on police behavior.
One concurrence says this is a Fifth Amendment case on self-testifying
One concurrence says this is a First Amendment case, as the Ohio statute is overbroad
This is so attractive.
Judicial Review: the power of the Supreme Court to review actions of the executive and legislative (interpret laws, strike down laws), made by Marbury v. Madison (the one that said it’s the job of the judicial branch to say what the law is)
Writ of Certiorari: officially, it is an order to a lower court to send up a case for review. But think of it more like “oh pleaaase scotus 🥺 look at our case! please take it!! because we address a significant constitutional question or federal courts have made contradictory rulings!!” (although there are some situations outlined by article 3 section 2 where the scotus has to take the case)
What else do you want me to do 🫶
Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Warning: possible misinformation as I yap from memory
purple = need to review
Facts:
A small explosion, involved with a gambling/racketeering group, triggers a police investigation
Dolly Mapp was suspected of harboring a suspect at her house
Mapp refuses to let investigators in without a warrant
3 hours later, they break in by force
They find someone hiding, though not the suspect
The investigators then search Mapp’s bedroom [no probable cause] and find obscene material, a violation of Ohio’s obscenity statute
Constitutional Rights Involved:
First Amendment: Does the Ohio obscenity statute burden free expression? Is there a First Amendment right to receive (obscene) information?
Fourth Amendment: Can evidence obtained without a warrant or probable cause be used in a case?
Context: Weeks v. US (1914) created the Exclusionary Rule, saying that no, it cannot. Wolf v. Colorado (1949) then incorporated the Fourth Amendment to the states, but not the Exclusionary Rule, deeming it nonfundamental.
During the scotus hearing, there was some confusion if this was a First or Fourth Amendment case.
Decisions
Wolf v Colorado overturned through the Due Process Clause, applying the Exclusionary Rule to the states, since there really is no Fourth Amendment without the rule to enforce it. As a result, Mapp has a significant impact on police behavior.
One concurrence says this is a Fifth Amendment case on self-testifying
One concurrence says this is a First Amendment case, as the Ohio statute is overbroad
This is so attractive.
Watch me solve world peas and hunger in 50 minutes tomorrow 🫶
I've decided to become the world's first quadrillionaire.
I consider myself worth that much, so I will be splitting myself into a quadrillion shares and I will be keeping 99.99999999999% of them. At this valuation, if one of you will purchase my single public share for $1 it will confirm my value as based in market reality, and therefore make me richer than Elon Musk.
Combined with my existing plans to blow up the moon, which will no doubt generate further trillions of dollars of share value through R&D that I will pinky promise to do in the future this is a very solid plan which I'm sure everyone's retirement funds will be more than happy to invest in, potentially driving any return on investment from that $1 share to well in excess of a billion dollars, so you would be a fool not to invest.
Using my newfound wealth I will personally build a rocket and send every Silicon Valley CEO to mars, and we will finally all be free.
How to invest
breaking news: crook
@ask-bernstein Would you care to explain this statement? This is not helping your allegations.
As long as you explain your response.
I’m trying to appeal to your fancy. You would have done the same 😒
Well I could say that I was doing the same.
Richard Nixon Does Not Appeal To Me.
He did this election cycle.
I’d say it was in spite of his looks rather than because. I did not have sexual relations with that crook.
This map contests otherwise for his looks.
He didn’t even win the popular vote. I’m starting to think YOU find him appealing.
What do you mean “he didn’t win the popular vote”??
O wait that’s the wrong election oops. quick who made the three motions of perpendicular law
…you should really rest.
and you do all my work?
@ask-bernstein Would you care to explain this statement? This is not helping your allegations.
As long as you explain your response.
I’m trying to appeal to your fancy. You would have done the same 😒
Well I could say that I was doing the same.
Richard Nixon Does Not Appeal To Me.
He did this election cycle.
I’d say it was in spite of his looks rather than because. I did not have sexual relations with that crook.
This map contests otherwise for his looks.
He didn’t even win the popular vote. I’m starting to think YOU find him appealing.
What do you mean “he didn’t win the popular vote”??
O wait that’s the wrong election oops. quick who made the three motions of perpendicular law
@ask-bernstein Would you care to explain this statement? This is not helping your allegations.
As long as you explain your response.
I’m trying to appeal to your fancy. You would have done the same 😒
Well I could say that I was doing the same.
Richard Nixon Does Not Appeal To Me.
He did this election cycle.
I’d say it was in spite of his looks rather than because. I did not have sexual relations with that crook.
This map contests otherwise for his looks.
He didn’t even win the popular vote. I’m starting to think YOU find him appealing.
@ask-bernstein Would you care to explain this statement? This is not helping your allegations.
As long as you explain your response.
I’m trying to appeal to your fancy. You would have done the same 😒
Well I could say that I was doing the same.
Richard Nixon Does Not Appeal To Me.
He did this election cycle.
I’d say it was in spite of his looks rather than because. I did not have sexual relations with that crook.
@ask-bernstein Would you care to explain this statement? This is not helping your allegations.
As long as you explain your response.
I’m trying to appeal to your fancy. You would have done the same 😒
Well I could say that I was doing the same.
Richard Nixon Does Not Appeal To Me.
@ask-bernstein Would you care to explain this statement? This is not helping your allegations.
As long as you explain your response.
I’m trying to appeal to your fancy. You would have done the same 😒
@ask-bernstein Would you care to explain this statement? This is not helping your allegations.
“Nixon looks a lot like his mother…I don’t mean disrespect to his mother”
I’m so serious.
I don’t know how to explain this. But it’s giving Houdini if Houdini was ugly and a politician
blonde people are so scary why cant u have a normal hair color like black or brown or green or green
