DawgTalkers.net Forums Active Threads This Week

Nick Chubb is truly one of my all time favorite Cleveland Browns players. He is the type of player and man that the Browns should always try to add to this organization. A great athlete and an even better man. Congratulations Nick ! Go Browns!

I don't suggest that at all. What I am saying is people who don't have the aptitude for a meaningful degree shouldn't be pushed down the college path by parents, school counselors and everyone else. Colleges shouldn't accept those who don't qualify using real qualifiers.

The fact that the cost of college has spiked is all the more reason for my comments.

So now you want to address the high cost of education. Cutting the numbers of colleges would be a good step. The number has increased tremendously since the late 60's. The same with totally worthless degrees.

Back then you could buy a new car for $4,000, so indeed, the value of our money has dropped.

It's not a wait and see in some cases, as I said in some.

If a team is in desperate need, they may offer more for a player than just simply waiting on a player for a tradeline date.

I get what you're saying. However you're trying to compare the 7th overall pick in the draft at QB to pick #144 at the same position.

Teams don't give up or trade the #7 overall pick in the draft at QB after a single season. The entire NFL felt it was the right choice to leave Sanders on the board until the fifth round. No team actually feels it's a legitimate attempt to draft a starting QB at pick #144. A decent shot at a backup and a hope and a prayer as a starter at best. They already had their preconceived value of Sanders before that draft began. Nothing he has done since then has given them cause to think differently now.

Based on stats alone I get your point. But overall this is an apples to oranges comparison.

The emergency order allows states, for now, to use the Trump administration's revamped version of a Department of Homeland Security program, called Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, or SAVE, in their efforts to verify the eligibility of voters on their rolls. It's a program that has drawn scrutiny for its use of voters' sensitive personal data and its tendency to wrongly flag some eligible voters as noncitizens.

The court's three liberal-leaning justices publicly dissented from the decision.

States' use of the SAVE program is voluntary, limiting the ruling's impact on the midterm elections. Existing law also blocks most states from systematically purging voters from their rolls within 90 days of an election, said David Becker, an election law expert who leads the Center for Election Innovation and Research. He said DHS itself has admitted the data is not perfect.

Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, a Democrat who has refused to participate in the SAVE program, said the ruling will have no effect in her state because it “does not force states to change the way we run our elections.”

The plaintiffs and their lawyers in the case called the ruling “profoundly disappointing” and said it puts “millions of Americans at risk of being unlawfully targeted by the administration’s unreliable voter purge database” before the midterms.

On X, James Percival, the general counsel for DHS, responded to a post about the decision with, “Yes, you read that right. We had to file an emergency petition in the Supreme Court just so we could use government data to help states stop noncitizens from illegally voting.”

Ruling pauses a lower court's ban on the tool

The court’s order puts on hold a federal judge’s June ruling that had deemed the Republican administration’s recently revamped version of SAVE illegal. U.S. District Court Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan had blocked the use of the tool, saying it violated Americans’ privacy rights and could result in voters being wrongly removed from the rolls.

A federal appeals court let her order stand.

But the Supreme Court majority found that a 1996 law explicitly allows DHS to get information about citizenship and immigration from other federal agencies. The federal government also has “an obligation to respond” to states seeking to verify citizenship.

“The order below prevents the Federal Government from using the program it believes is best suited to the task,” the majority wrote in the unsigned order.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor. The database has long been seen to fall under federal privacy laws, she wrote, and there are real risks that legitimate voter registrations could be mistakenly revoked.

“The harm caused by burdening or disenfranchising even a few lawful voters outweighs the nonexistent harm that the Government experiences when it is prevented from taking an action that it likely lacks the authority to take,” Jackson wrote.

The plaintiffs pledged to do “everything in our power” to ensure the district court decision stands.
Trump administration tool has wrongly flagged some legal registrants

The SAVE program was created under an immigration law mandating that DHS help federal, state and local agencies prevent government benefits from going to noncitizens. The Trump administration last year moved to significantly expand its search abilities. Since then, at least 67 million registrations have been scanned through the program, but critics worry it could end up purging valid voters from the rolls.

Some registrants have already been wrongly flagged. In Travis County, Texas, for example, officials said they investigated 97 voters flagged by SAVE as apparent noncitizens and found that at least 10% of them — and likely up to 21% — were U.S. citizens. The county urged the Supreme Court to reject the administration’s appeal, while the state of Texas submitted its own brief defending the database.

In Denton, Texas, north of Dallas, voter Anthony Nels was disappointed that the Supreme Court allowed the continued use “of a system that harms people’s constitutional right to vote.”

Last year, after Texas ran its voter registrations through the SAVE system, Nels, 29, was flagged as a potential noncitizen, even though the South Africa native had become a U.S. citizen more than a decade ago. His local election office temporarily canceled his registration while he obtained a new passport to replace an expired one.

“This just seems like another illegitimate way to affect upcoming and future elections,” he said in a text to The Associated Press.

Stephen Richer, the Republican former top election official in Arizona's largest county, said the Supreme Court's ruling could be a positive step “if used responsibly.”

“That being said, the SAVE program has been shown time after time to be a highly-imperfect tool, so election administrators should only use it as a starting point, not as a definitive indicator of citizenship,” he wrote on social media.
SAVE is one piece of the administration's crusade against noncitizen voting

Even though the use of the SAVE program was blocked for months ahead of Friday's ruling, the administration has said in court filings that it has continued using Social Security Administration data "in certain cases to verify information and help determine whether illegal voting may have occurred."

DHS in August launched its own investigation to find noncitizen voters on state rolls, according to a federal whistleblower statement that said the effort is rushed, filled with errors and potentially violates state laws. DHS has defended that investigation as being conducted “diligently and professionally.”

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin also suggested over the summer that there could be as many as 250,000 noncitizens registered to vote across four states, an unsubstantiated claim that puzzled state election officials who said the numbers dramatically exceeded their own findings.

The effort to create a national voter list is among numerous steps Trump has taken during his second term to try to overhaul the way elections are run. Most of those steps have been blocked by various courts, in part because the Constitution gives states and Congress the authority to set election rules, but provides no such power to the president. In mid-September, the Supreme Court rejected a bid from Trump to restrict mail ballot procedures before the midterms.

Trump has remained fixated on the idea that massive numbers of noncitizens are voting in U.S. races, but all evidence says otherwise.

Ahead of the 2024 presidential election, Georgia’s secretary of state found that 20 of the state’s 8.2 million registered voters were not U.S. citizens. In Ohio, prosecutors secured indictments against nine people for voting as noncitizens over the span of 10 years. The state has some 8 million registered voters. Even with the Trump administration laser-focused on the issue in his second term, DHS said its investigations into potential noncitizens on voter rolls nationwide had led to 160 arrests.

Those numbers are supported by a mountain of research at the national and state level that has found the percentage of noncitizens on voter rolls is a tiny fraction of the nation's registered voters.

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/nat...eral-voter-eligibility-database/4148570/

In the end we will find out if this will be used as a tool or a weapon. If it actually lives up to what it claims it will do that's a good thing and a useful tool.

If it ends up targeting legal voters in closely contested red states where they lose and is used in order to refuse confirming their elections results that is using it as a weapon. I can see a scenario where this could tie up election results closely in closely contested red states in the courts so long it will not be settled until trump leaves office. It's easy to claim something and make proving it's false a very difficult task.

Time will tell.

You know how Republicans or should I say, MAGA keeps telling us that Democrats/Liberals are communists? Think of RTR......Then you'll know what is and isn't Communist.

Baseball has taught me it is one pitch at a time.

I am guilty of looking at favorable pitching match-ups. I always check what today's starter has done on his last three starts.

But I know things can play out and go the wrong way.

Once the post season begins you can throw away all the "favorite talk."

Baseball can humble favorites.

I suck at picks thus far, but that's a normal feeling lol

The furries are coming to get you!

In a sign of support and standing in solidarity with the media against trump banning CNN, MS Now and Politico from The White House, Spanks has immediately stopped production of its ankle girdles.

Lol.

If I could sing.

I would want to be able to sing like Nat King Cole or Joe Cocker.

Definitely couldn't have dropped him, but I'm curious how much of the restructures to drag out the cap hit were necessary or if we were still trying to save the plan vs blow everything up.

i guess you could re sign with the same losing team for more money and then bolt to another SB contender for even more money. that could ease a lot of pain

So sorry to hear this. He was one of the first posters I interacted with when I joined the original board back in 2003. Wish I could have met him, he seemed like a great guy.
RIP GM

We get it. All of you ignore what trump does and says while blaming others for posting it. It's a very weak attempt at deflection and blaming the messenger rather than addressing the message but it's better than nothing I suppose.

See I told you so.

He did more to "make" SS IMO versus SS on his own skills. This is the Bigs, and someone decided SS couldn't manage it on his own. Disappointing.