#the oakland

[aci25]

Oakland, California

[boytransmission]

I kept mishearing a lyric from Sir Mix-A-Lot’s “Baby Got Back” and this is what it said to me

Top surgery fund!!!!!!!!

[petitworld]

Grand Lake, Oakland, California, USA by Claire Ames

[foldingfittedsheets]

Hey, kind of a long shot but figured it never hurts to ask:

Do any of my followers live or know someone in Oakland, CA who’s looking for a dog? Our friend Richard and his wife just had a baby and they’ve tried so hard but the new baby and dog are just not compatible.

He’s about nine, very high energy and affectionate. Not a good fit with kids or cats as he’s pretty high prey drive but very friendly and well socialized otherwise.

Here’s Milo

Shoot me a DM if interested. They’d love to be able to see him sometimes if you’d also like to make friends with some cool nerds.

[cyani07]

revamped drawing for clancy world tour !

[petersong3]

Baseball time...⚾️🍟

Tiempo de béisbol...⚾🍟

#MLB #ArizonaDiamondbacks #AtlantaBraves #BaltimoreOrioles #BostonRedSox #ChicagoCubs #ChicagoWhiteSox #CincinnatiReds #ClevelandGuardians #ColoradoRockies #DetroitTigers #HoustonAstros #KansasCityRoyals

#LosAngelesAngels #LosAngelesDodgers #MiamiMarlins #MilwaukeeBrewers #MinnesotaTwins #NewYorkMets #NewYorkYankees #OaklandAthletics

#PhiladelphiaPhillies #PittsburghPirates #SanDiegoPadres #SanFranciscoGiants #SeattleMariners #StLouisCardinals #TampaBayRays #TexasRangers TorontoBlueJays #WashingtonNationals

[outofcontextdanandphil]

They keep matching each other's freak :/

[gunsounds]

Tacos and pineapple juice 🌮

[qualitystart]

obsessed with how much fun lindsey wasson is having with color and shape and light and shadow and framing in her spring training photos

she's everything to me

[swizziee]

Too $hort. (2000)

[reasonsforhope]

"Palestinian plaintiffs and their legal representatives on Friday [January 26, 2024] presented a powerful case in federal court accusing President Joe Biden and other top US officials of complicity in Israel's genocide in Gaza.

People around the world tuned in for the long-awaited hearing in Oakland, with plaintiffs appearing in person and over Zoom in an unprecedented effort to hold the Biden administration accountable for its actions in Gaza.

The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed the lawsuit in November 2023 on behalf of Defense for Children International–Palestine, Al-Haq, and eight Palestinians in the US and Palestine. The complaint accuses President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin of failing to live up to their legal responsibilities under the 1948 Genocide Convention and the 1988 Genocide Convention Implementation Act.

The United Nations convention classifies complicity in genocide, or the intentional destruction of a people in whole or in part, as a crime under international law and requires that states take measures to prevent such atrocities.

[Note: This is a big reason why politicians almost never call it a genocide, btw. Because if a country recognizes that it's a genocide, then they actually are legally required to do a bunch of things to stop it, under international law.]

The historic lawsuit contends that the Biden administration has failed to uphold its obligations by continuing to provide diplomatic and military support for Israel's brutal campaign in Gaza. Plaintiffs are asking the court to stop Biden from sending more weapons and munitions to Israel that are being used to kill Palestinians en masse.

The hearing before the US District Court for the Northern District of California took place just hours after the International Court of Justice issued provisional measures against Israel in a landmark case brought by South Africa.

-via TAG24, January 26, 2024. Article continues below.

Court contends with questions of jurisdiction and responsibility

In evaluating the allegations, questioning in Friday's hearing revolved around the so-called political question doctrine, by which federal courts regularly refrain from ruling on political matters seen as best resolved by the president and Congress.

The Department of Justice argued that according to the doctrine, the court has no jurisdiction to rule in the case.

"If the court condemns United States foreign policy toward Israel, it could cause international embarrassment and undermine foreign policy decisions in the sensitive context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict," defense counsel Jean Lin told Senior District Judge Jeffrey S. White.

Katherine Gallagher of the CCR countered that the court does, indeed, have a responsibility to step in: "Here, the question is a legal one, whether the actions undertaken by the United States failed to uphold the obligation to prevent genocide, and that is an active obligation that requires that the United States not provide the means by which a genocide is being furthered."

"There is no discretion for any state to evade its obligations, its legal obligations. These are not policy decisions," she said.

Palestinian plaintiffs share powerful testimonies before the court

After legal arguments in the case, Judge White heard two hours of gut-wrenching testimony from Palestinian plaintiffs and a renowned Holocaust and genocide expert.

Rubin Presidential Chair of Jewish History at Wake Forest University Dr. Barry Trachtenberg shared his remarks before the court in spite of vehement US government opposition.

"To have an event fall under the 1948 Convention on Genocide requires both action and intent, and here we see that very, very clearly in a way that seems really quite unique in history," he stated, noting that there is now an opportunity to stop Israel's unfolding genocide in real time to prevent further loss of lives...

Judge White said he would take the testimonies to heart as he evaluates his constitutional responsibilities, describing the case as "the most difficult judicial decision" he has ever had to make."

-via TAG24, January 26, 2024

-

Note: I know a lot of people are really not gonna appreciate that last line. I'm not thrilled with it either. But it is worth noting that having a federal court overrule the US president's huge foreign policy and military decisions would be an absolutely massive deal/precedent

This is a case that deserves to be ruled on with an incredible amount of seriousness, if only because if you're a federal judge who's going to make that call, your written decision/legal justification needs to be unimpeachable

That said, if the judge uses jurisdiction to pass the buck here and avoid his legal and human responsibility to do what he can to stop a genocide, I'm gonna be pissed

[equivocations]

a few sketches I made in SF this spring, despite getting a nasty cold on day 2! some scribbly linework is all I could muster

[shocymer]

RUDE.

ATEEZ Towards The Light Oakland (240717) ©ttro

[brettesims]

Free Palestine!

Oakland, CA

Love demands a permanent ceasefire!

FREE 🍉

[geniusphilester]

my best bootleg still and of course it was sister daniel