Sasuke Mermaid AU When @justsimmering - Tumblr Blog

Sasuke…oh my Sasuke..

the thing about sakura and hinata and so many female charachters is that them being motivated by sasuke and naruto would’ve been fine and dandy if sasuke and naruto were equally as motivated by them, but they’re just not. sasuke and naruto work as well as they do because they’re fundamentally equals who want to surpass e/o and compete with e/o, so there’s a certain level of reciprocacy between them that doesn’t exist with anyone else and creates this imbalance. even if you say that canonically sasuke loved and married sakura, and same with naruto and hinata, neither of them are challenged by them. and anyway, their love wasn’t the only thing they wanted - sakura wanted to protect naruto and sasuke. hinata wanted to be recognized for her strength. but do they ever?

beybuniki

unparalleled

#ns #ns art

hanzya0

#ns #ns art #they're so soft

s0nnig

i have been thinking about them

#ns #ns art

iv3ysmermaidscales

Oh my gosh this art is fucking angelic

#ns #ns art

cheglok-art

Kākāpō believes in you ☀

actuallyshion

Play mates 👨🏼‍❤️‍💋‍👨🏻🏀

#ns #ns art

justynarerak

That’s the one!

georgialawman

。。。ミヽ(。＞＜)ノ

@kkobweek yaauy. day one: parent figures (kushina :3), additional prompt: any au

#SOBBING #MY BABIES #obkk

woman-respecter

12 year old girls in the early 2000s watching the accidental kiss in episode 3 of naruto

destiel-news-network

(Opinion)

The ruling in Louisiana v. Callais says that the long-held VRA requirement of making states create districts where communities of color could elect the candidate of their choice is "race-based discrimination". The vote was 6–3, with all Republicans in the majority and Democrats dissenting.

Justice Kagan, in dissent, says that this decision essentially kills the VRA — but does so without explicitly saying the VRA is unconstitutional, because that would invoke public outrage.

Coupled with the Court's previous opinions in Shelby County (eliminating the requirement for historically-racist states to get federal approval for their election laws), Easley v. Cromartie (allowing gerrymandering that hurts racial minorities if it has a partisan goal), and Rucho v. Common Cause (allowing partisan gerrymandering), this means that racial gerrymandering is now effectively legal in the Republican-controlled American South. Now, only racial gerrymandering without a partisan pretext is banned — and due to strong racial partisan divides, especially in the South, such a partisan pretext basically always exists.

Republicans could use this decision to target up to 12 majority-minority districts that were previously protected by the VRA.