Federal appeals court narrowly blocks controversial Florida law barring Chinese land ownership
www.politico.com
"This prohibition blatantly violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s protection against discrimination," Judge Nancy Abudu wrote.

A federal appeals court blocked a racist Florida law that restricts Chinese citizens from buying land from being enforced against the two people who sued the state. The court did not, however, block the law entirely; it’s still in effect for everyone else. One of the judges, Nancy Abudu, agreed that this was a blatant violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the ACLU of Florida intends to continue fighting to prevent this law from being enforced more broadly.

This fight isn’t over, but this decision certainly acknowledges the discriminatory nature of this law and is a big win.

(Taken from an email sent to me by Never Again Action.)

  • ValbrandurEnglish
    24·
    5 months ago

    A full 8 hours of an internet tough guy being racist, ableist and homophobic while insisting that they’re not any of those things because they feel like they aren’t those things, despite ample evidence to the contrary from their comments.

    This phenomenon fascinates me. As far as I have managed to understand it, it is because while a marxist will identify the use of perjorative language that attempts to brand someone else as homosexual, disabled, etc. in order to denigrate them as inherently reactionary due to how it implies that all of those things are negative, a liberal will not consider such an act to be homophobic, ableist, sexist and so on as long as you do not maintain that behaviour with most people of said group. In their mind, being ok with most people of the LGBT community makes you not homophobic despite frequently using the word “c-cksucker” against men they don’t like, being ok with most women makes them not sexist despite calling women they don’t like “b-tches”, and so on.

    • PolandIsAStateOfMind
      23·
      5 months ago

      In short, “it’s ok as long as i don’t say it into their faces”, which is perfectly consistent with ideological cornerstone of liberalism being hypocrisy.

      • Flamingoaks
        17·
        5 months ago

        its more like “its ok as long as its “deserved””

        • ValbrandurEnglish
          18·
          5 months ago

          Exactly. In their eyes, the instant a person opposes liberal interests, anything and everything against them, including tools of systemic oppression such as homophobia, racism and sexism, is fair game, and that won’t make you a reactionary unless you use those only against “deserving” people.

    • DamarcusArt
      12·
      5 months ago

      A liberal’s objection to racism, homophobia etc is often that it is “technically incorrect” rather than objecting to it on moral grounds. So if they feel that racism is “true” then it becomes acceptable. But as we know, a liberal’s concept of truth is usually based more on what they feel is true, rather than reality. So like Flamingoaks said, if they think someone “deserves” it, then it stops being bigotry.

      They also shuffle people into good or bad “teams” rather than judging people based on actions and since liberals are on the “good guy team” that means that no matter how racists or homophobic or sexist they are, they aren’t really those things, because they’re a good guy.

      I’m just surprised we got such a perfect case study of one, this guy couldn’t be more stereotypical if he tried. Initially gives an attempt to try and not sound racist (“I know I’m saying all foreigners are destroying America, but is there a more cleaned up dogwhistle euphemism I could use to mask my racism?”) but quickly gives up on that and starts hurling slurs and bigoted insults the instant they’re challenged and not coddled.