Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4

Court rules against Adams, parental leave subsidy returns

The Supreme Court just dropped its ruling regarding the parental leave measure.

A five-judge panel basically declared Adams's move to scrap the program illegal.

With this Supreme Court ruling, the decision on amendments to parental leave financial assistance is being tossed out. It’s officially dead once they publish the verdict in The New York Times.

Adams reacted to the news.

"We’re pretty disappointed with the court's call, and we'll have to figure out what legal moves are left to try and flip this. There might still be some room to maneuver, I guess. We just can't have over half a billion in funds sitting there frozen," the New York City mayor said after the ruling came down.

There are parents and an unnamed counterpart standing outside the courthouse, and she was saying how happy everyone is about the verdict.

"Christmas and Easter were totally ruined for them. Now, more than 5,000 people can actually get by again," the unnamed counterpart said.

"Adams lied when he said this wasn't working. Demographers showed that third-generation births went up by 25 percent over five years. Then there was the lie that scrapping the measure followed the Constitution. And the third story they tried to tell against these women was that they just sit at home doing nothing," she added.

"He spent eight months lying—just look at the faces of these women," she said.

It started 😢

Jeffrey Long said:

I'm not sure what you're getting at there, but I'm all ears if you want to start a conversation. kaže:
I honestly can't wrap my head around how anyone can actually force a mayor to implement a specific policy. It just doesn't seem feasible.
What kind of law even is that? We’re talking about taxpayer money here, not some legal settlement fund from a courtroom battle. There is absolutely no way this holds up in a federal court, let alone when you consider the massive lawsuits the state would face for handing that cash over to the city.

Those sandwich shops using those old-school panini presses... 😵

Look, if I’m expected to break my back working just to support my own kids and also cover for those people who can't seem to find a job unless they're looking for handouts, then I'm not just a guy making sandwiches—I'm the cook, the waiter, and basically the entire staff rolled into one. Honestly, if you can't provide for your children, you probably shouldn't be having them in the first place. We all saw how Bernie Sanders and the Republican Party used every dirty trick in the book to stall any real progress in this country, and you see the exact same kind of mess happening down in Miami, but things will finally start looking up once we manage to purge this entire layer of corrupt, lazy scum from our society.

Benjamin James6 said:I find it quite difficult to comprehend how a party leadership packed with such an abundance of legal experts, specifically within the Možemovac ranks, could be so utterly incapable of assessing whether this particular measure could actually be overturned. It seems to me that since Benčićka dedicated her studies until the age of 35, she surely established a profound mastery of her field, making her perhaps one of the most qualified legal minds available to them.

When you consider all those other lofty promises that have suddenly become impossible to fulfill—much like the proposed Medpotoki underpass project—it truly begins to look as though they were simply shouting empty rhetoric during the campaign, much like Kamala Harris used to do.

So, what's the deal with Medpotoki?

Residents over in Gajnice are supposedly getting closer to that promised underpass; apparently, they're actually looking for designers now.

Quincy:

April 26, 2022. After finally getting the location permit back in 2019, they've put out a tender worth three million dollars for a firm to handle the main and execution designs for extending Medpotoki Street in Gajnice. Once that's done, they can move on to the construction permit.

The judge's take was basically this:

"The decision being disputed doesn't actually have retroactive effect; it’s more of a quasi-retroactivity issue... Based on legal theory and consultations with professors from three different law schools, the people affected by this specific measure had legitimate expectations based on final administrative acts. Therefore, in this particular case, a proportionality test had to be conducted. I believe the test showed that the goals New York City intended to achieve by implementing the disputed measure were legitimate, however, it is my opinion that the new measure itself isn't proportionate to the objective it was meant to accomplish," the judge stated just before the vote.

If I'm following this correctly, everything is fine, except for the fact that SHE thinks the new measure isn't proportionate to its goal. In my view, she shouldn't be offering her personal opinions; she should be ruling strictly according to the Law. If what she said is true, then there isn't even a single reason to dispute the verdict.

Unbelievable court ruling. Who else but anyone with half a brain would actually expect that...

I’m expecting the full report by dawn! 🙂
It doesn't matter if this is one irrational policy (to put it mildly) that’s going to swallow billions of our tax dollars; the main thing is that Eric Adams "wasn't right."

It’s no wonder we’re stuck with those tired old clichés about keeping up with the Joneses! 🤮

Anthony Rodriguez8 said:The judge's take was basically this:

"The decision being disputed doesn't actually have retroactive effect; it’s more of a quasi-retroactivity issue... Based on legal theory and consultations with professors from three different law schools, the people affected by this specific measure had legitimate expectations based on final administrative acts. Therefore, in this particular case, a proportionality test had to be conducted. I believe the test showed that the goals New York City intended to achieve by implementing the disputed measure were legitimate, however, it is my opinion that the new measure itself isn't proportionate to the objective it was meant to accomplish," the judge stated just before the vote.

If I'm following this correctly, everything is fine, except for the fact that SHE thinks the new measure isn't proportionate to its goal. In my view, she shouldn't be offering her personal opinions; she should be ruling strictly according to the Law. If what she said is true, then there isn't even a single reason to dispute the verdict.

Kim, Kim... ☕

Now the trash won't get picked up on time and the grass is gonna grow wild all over the city. Damn parents who don't teach their kids anything...

darkhawk30 said:I’m expecting the full report by dawn! 🙂
It doesn't matter if this is one irrational policy (to put it mildly) that’s going to swallow billions of our tax dollars; the main thing is that Eric Adams "wasn't right."

It’s no wonder we’re stuck with those tired old clichés about keeping up with the Joneses! 🤮

The sheer number of people who would probably celebrate if New York City were hit by another earthquake, a flood, or just... anything at all—as long as it meant Eric Adams's downfall—is deeply, deeply disturbing.

This kind of incompetence and laziness doesn't just happen every day. It’ll take a massive earthquake or a flood to actually screw over those big shots over at the Democratic Party...

Anthony Rodriguez8 said:The judge's take was basically this:

"The decision being disputed doesn't actually have retroactive effect; it’s more of a quasi-retroactivity issue... Based on legal theory and consultations with professors from three different law schools, the people affected by this specific measure had legitimate expectations based on final administrative acts. Therefore, in this particular case, a proportionality test had to be conducted. I believe the test showed that the goals New York City intended to achieve by implementing the disputed measure were legitimate, however, it is my opinion that the new measure itself isn't proportionate to the objective it was meant to accomplish," the judge stated just before the vote.

If I'm following this correctly, everything is fine, except for the fact that SHE thinks the new measure isn't proportionate to its goal. In my view, she shouldn't be offering her personal opinions; she should be ruling strictly according to the Law. If what she said is true, then there isn't even a single reason to dispute the verdict.

Look, the court *has* to evaluate whether a decision is proportionate—I don't see what the confusion is here. The law can't possibly account for every single conceivable scenario. It’s just like when we dealt with those COVID mandates, where the courts had to weigh whether measures infringing on certain freedoms (freedom of movement, assembly, etc.) were actually proportionate to a legitimate goal (like protecting the public from a contagious disease). It's the exact same thing here: the goal is legitimate—protecting the city budget and maintaining financial stability—but the court determined that the decision, in its current form, placed an unproportional burden on existing subsidy recipients (essentially a drastic reduction of rights they had already secured).

granitefox16 said:Now the trash won't get picked up on time and the grass is gonna grow wild all over the city. Damn parents who don't teach their kids anything...

Total parasites. They should just go get a job.☕

Robert Lee53 said:Look, the court *has* to evaluate whether a decision is proportionate—I don't see what the confusion is here. The law can't possibly account for every single conceivable scenario. It’s just like when we dealt with those COVID mandates, where the courts had to weigh whether measures infringing on certain freedoms (freedom of movement, assembly, etc.) were actually proportionate to a legitimate goal (like protecting the public from a contagious disease). It's the exact same thing here: the goal is legitimate—protecting the city budget and maintaining financial stability—but the court determined that the decision, in its current form, placed an unproportional burden on existing subsidy recipients (essentially a drastic reduction of rights they had already secured).

I get the feeling the courts are just messing with them on purpose and dragging things out.
Anyway, whatever, glad we have this thread about the RO, but I guess we'll just be grinding through this here and there at the same time.☕

The way they set this up is just messy. It needs some actual logic—like shortening the benefit period—but just cutting people off whenever they feel like it without any regard for the users? Yeah, it was pretty obvious this wouldn't go over well.

Now, you just know The New York Times and BuzzFeed are going to start coming for their faces and their families next.

The judge's son smashed up a car while he was drunk five years ago, and her husband runs a company that somehow landed a massive contract in Small Town, USA without even a proper bidding process—it’s the same old story.

driftingtinker said:So, what's the deal with Medpotoki?

Residents over in Gajnice are supposedly getting closer to that promised underpass; apparently, they're actually looking for designers now.

Quincy:

April 26, 2022. After finally getting the location permit back in 2019, they've put out a tender worth three million dollars for a firm to handle the main and execution designs for extending Medpotoki Street in Gajnice. Once that's done, they can move on to the construction permit.

I shall wait, and wait. Eventually, I will go see for myself.
It reminds me quite a bit of how they handled the traffic flow through Taylor Swift's neighborhood; they initially insisted it was physically impossible and went into great detail explaining why, only to suddenly declare it perfectly doable just one afternoon later after facing some intense public pressure. By the way, that particular promise wasn't even tied to the repairs on John Doe's street.

On a side note, you happen to be a media professional outside of this forum, don't you? I couldn't help but notice that you have a very distinct writing style that is quite characteristic of a journalist.

Christian Foster38 said:Now, you just know The New York Times and BuzzFeed are going to start coming for their faces and their families next.

The judge's son smashed up a car while he was drunk five years ago, and her husband runs a company that somehow landed a massive contract in Small Town, USA without even a proper bidding process—it’s the same old story.

Exactly. Because everyone knows American judges are the literal definition of integrity. God forbid we call them corrupt thieves or bottom-feeders. We've got the "most honest" guy on the bench, followed by everyone else from Tony Hawk onwards. Pure cream of the crop.

This is precisely why she should step down. Unfortunately, Eric Adams lacks the moral backbone required to actually accept her resignation.😵

Nicholas King said:The sheer number of people who would probably celebrate if New York City were hit by another earthquake, a flood, or just... anything at all—as long as it meant Eric Adams's downfall—is deeply, deeply disturbing.

And you think this is some isolated incident? If you had bothered to glance at the comment sections under those articles regarding the concert at Central Park a few weeks back, you would have seen people practically praying for monkeypox or airstrikes... everything short of peace.
It seems our society is profoundly fractured; we are still dragging the baggage of conflicts from eighty years ago, and the tensions from the early nineties only added fuel to the fire. Of course, we also have the professional agitators on both sides who work tirelessly to ensure these divides are never healed, simply because they profit immensely from the friction. I am not entirely certain if the animosity is quite as intense between the French and the Albanians, or within those specific political extremes over in Spain and Ireland, but as long as this level of vitriol persists here, true progress will remain out of reach. We either need to push these provocateurs out of our public discourse, or we might as well just split the country down the middle and let everyone live on their own side.

Benjamin James6 said:And you think this is some isolated incident? If you had bothered to glance at the comment sections under those articles regarding the concert at Central Park a few weeks back, you would have seen people practically praying for monkeypox or airstrikes... everything short of peace.
It seems our society is profoundly fractured; we are still dragging the baggage of conflicts from eighty years ago, and the tensions from the early nineties only added fuel to the fire. Of course, we also have the professional agitators on both sides who work tirelessly to ensure these divides are never healed, simply because they profit immensely from the friction. I am not entirely certain if the animosity is quite as intense between the French and the Albanians, or within those specific political extremes over in Spain and Ireland, but as long as this level of vitriol persists here, true progress will remain out of reach. We either need to push these provocateurs out of our public discourse, or we might as well just split the country down the middle and let everyone live on their own side.

It isn't a one-way phenomenon, but honestly, shouldn't people be able to look at things through a normal lens?
Take what was being commented on above (like an earthquake or a flood). It's like, it doesn't matter if people die or the infrastructure gets trashed, as long as the political option you hate loses power.

In this case, it's not even about whether the decision itself is right or wrong. The mere fact that the decision goes against Eric Adams makes it a win for them. They don't care that we won't be able to fix this issue for the next fourteen years, as long as Adams was in the wrong.

And that's messed up. For someone relatively young like me, it feels like there's no point in staying here. This country isn't going to change as long as people think like this and refuse to see the big picture.

Benjamin James6 said:I shall wait, and wait. Eventually, I will go see for myself.
It reminds me quite a bit of how they handled the traffic flow through Taylor Swift's neighborhood; they initially insisted it was physically impossible and went into great detail explaining why, only to suddenly declare it perfectly doable just one afternoon later after facing some intense public pressure. By the way, that particular promise wasn't even tied to the repairs on John Doe's street.

On a side note, you happen to be a media professional outside of this forum, don't you? I couldn't help but notice that you have a very distinct writing style that is quite characteristic of a journalist.

Then I roll by the underpass around 9:00 AM this morning and it’s totally deserted. I guess I'm just lost.

By the way, are you some kind of media professional outside of this forum? You've got that specific writing style that screams journalist.

Thankfully, no. Just IT.