patrick.net

rando says

White male landowners are mentioned in the Constitution?

Sloppy wording on my part. The federal constitution directs the states to decide voting criteria. The states put the the voting criteria into their constitutions.

mell says

80% subjective, the 80/20 rule works well as always. You have few cases where there is a Manifesto, other than that it's mostly subjective, and worse, it goes back into the past. It is entirely possible that somebody made an offensive remark and is later involved in an incident and therefore will be tried per hate crime laws although there is no connection - or even worse or that they will be accused of having made such statements while they didn't, and it is very plausible that somebody who actually hates a groups race/gender/ethnicity and what not will conceal the fact in their crimes, so they would not be tried according to those laws. They are a precursor to thought-crimes and extremely dangerous.

It's entirely possible? Many things are entirely possible including the end of civilization due to a major meteor strike. Anything more specific than entirely possible? If there is no connection then there should be no problem with a lawyer getting it thrown out. I'm not familiar with any hate crime law so vague that some casual offensive remark (how would such a remark become court record in the first place?) in the past would trigger it. . So we are back to your ignoring the question what alleged leftists/cultural-marxists hate crime law are you talking about and how has it been applied/misapplied to support your case?

Have you ever been on a jury for a criminal case? Many can be 80% or more subjective. How do you think the difference between first degree murder, second degree murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter is sorted out as an example? It often comes down to subjective judgement of intent based on who's story is more believable. It's the exact same principle. What was the intent? Is this a precursor to thought-crimes also?