Finally opened one of the jars of turkey meat I canned a while back. I'll use the rest of the jar for ... tacos? Probably tacos.

Cost per person: $2.45

On a recent walk, Io (like the jovian moon) was taking her time exploring a flower covered field.

Washington (United States) (AFP) – The US Supreme Court on Thursday backed a Trump administration move to strip deportation protections from some 350,000 Haitians and 6,000 Syrians living in the United States.

The 6-3 ruling by the conservative-dominated court could have implications for more than one million beneficiaries of so-called Temporary Protected Status (TPS) from more than a dozen countries.

Justice Samuel Alito, whose majority opinion was joined by the five other conservative justices, said the Department of Homeland Security's decision to end TPS for Haitians and Syrians was not subject to judicial review.

TPS protects its holders from deportation and is granted to people deemed to be in danger if they return home because of war, natural disaster or other extraordinary circumstances.

Lawyers for Haitian and Syrian TPS holders contended during oral arguments in April that conditions back home remained unsafe and the administration's move was motivated at least in part by racial hostility.

Alito rejected claims that race was a "motivating factor" in President Donald Trump's decision to strip Haitians of TPS status.

"None of the cited statements by either the President or the (Homeland Security) Secretary was overtly racial, and in substance all expressed policy views that could rest on race-neutral justifications," Alito wrote.

Trump campaigned for the White House on a pledge to expel millions of migrants and has pushed to dismantle the TPS program as part of his broader immigration crackdown.

At the height of the 2024 presidential election campaign, the Republican president stoked fears about Haitian immigrants by falsely claiming they were eating Americans' pets.

TPS status has been revoked for nationals of Afghanistan, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Honduras, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Somalia, South Sudan, Venezuela, Yemen, and others in addition to Haitians and Syrians since Trump took office.

Haitians became eligible for TPS in 2010 following a devastating earthquake and the country continues to suffer from extreme poverty, rampant violence from heavily armed gangs and chronic political instability.

The State Department advises Americans not to travel to the Caribbean nation "due to kidnapping, crime, civil unrest and limited health care."

TPS was extended to war-torn Syria in 2012.

...

Окуповане Єнакієве, Донецька обл.

https://t.me/exilenova_plus/23792

It is too hot here. I have become one with the sweat. I assume that this is Aldrich's actual origin story

Streaming models, licensing restrictions, platform shutdowns, and cyberattacks are reshaping, manipulating, and at times, erasing our records—making it more difficult than ever to preserve important cultural works like these.

In response to this, the Internet Archive released a new book, Vanishing Culture: A Report on Our Fragile Cultural Record.

Reminder that The Internet Archive needs support if you're in a position to help. Not affiliated just a long-time fan.

I'm sure there's a better community for this but couldn't land on one. Any suggestions?

A newly obtained audio recording shows that Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. personally pressured a Libertarian congressional candidate in Iowa to abandon a competitive House race, urging him to step aside to protect Republican control of Congress.

The Washington Post obtained a recording of the 12-minute call in which Kennedy told Rick Stewart, the Libertarian candidate in Iowa's 2nd Congressional District, that he was acting as a "liaison" with the White House, and he warned that a Democratic takeover of the House would derail President Donald Trump's agenda and suggested he could help Stewart if he exited the race.

“I can’t go into specifics because there’s legal prohibitions about that,” Kennedy told Stewart in the June 11 call. “If it’s something that you want to talk about, you know, you and I can talk about specifics.”

One of the most basic facts about biology we have known for decades is that a woman's estrogen levels are supposed to go up and down quite significantly during the course of her cycle. A cycle that starts around the same time as Puberty and which ends during menopause.

It makes no sense to me that in spite this being common knowledge doctors and even fellow trans people will parrot the idea that you can just average a woman's cycle out and as long as you stay around that average (often far below average) you'll be fine.

To me this comes from the transphobic idea that trans women and cis women are these fundamentally different creatures who respond to estrogen very definitely.

I didn't test this intentional at first but "luckily" Hrt isnt a thing in my country (trans people as far as the medical system is concerned don't exist) so I've been forced to DIY. As a result of fumbling around trying to figure out my doses without really checking levels I came to realize multiple things.

My sex drive changes depending on my dose. High doses meant for the week my libido would be very high low doses meant the opposite.

Where I felt changes (my skin stretching from fat redistribution) changed depending on dosage. Typically a lower dose meant more chest development while a higher dose meant I felt more stretching in my hips)

Emotional changes where either more present or less present depending levels

After doing a bit o research I found that all these things are natural things the majority of women go through during their cycle.

The trans people who completely lose their ability to have a libido are likely just on a dose which represents a low for them and since they constantly stay at a low they don't experience what their natural libido is supposed to be.

And on the flip side the trans people who become hyper sexual have the reverse issue. They are constantly at a level which represents a "high" for them meaning they never get a break from it and are also robbed of what a natural libido is supposed to feel like.

I'm tired of people trying to claim at x dose you should experience changes as if looking feminine is the only function of estrogen in the human body and as if "average levels" Don't already look way different from person to person.

Trans women are normal women and shouldn't be robbed of as natural of a hormone system as possible. Our current system is working backwards from the idea that trans women are just men who "want" To look like women when that's not true.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.today/post/55397665

The ‘June 26 movement’ may bring thousands to the streets. But threats and manipulations are distorting its message — as has happened before.

Washington (United States) (AFP) – The US Supreme Court sided with multinational giant Bayer on Thursday, overturning a lower court ruling that exposed the company to thousands of claims that the Monsanto weedkiller Roundup causes cancer.

In a 7-2 decision, the US high court sent back to a Missouri state court a $1.25 million jury award against the Germany-based company, concluding that the US Environmental Protection Agency's determination that Roundup is not a carcinogen preempts claims in state court tying the product to a cancer diagnosis.

Shares of Bayer, which acquired Monsanto in 2018, soared 18.7 percent on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange. The ruling is expected to speed efforts by the industrial giant to move past the litigation following billions of dollars in settlements.

The Supreme Court case stems from a suit brought by John Durnell, who had won a failure-to-warn suit in a Missouri court in 2024.

Durnell -- who relied on Monsanto marketing that Roundup was safe to spray on clothing -- blamed the product for his blood cancer diagnosis.

He argued that the International Agency for Research on Cancer considers glyphosate, one of Roundup's ingredients, a probable human carcinogen.

But Bayer, whose case was backed by the administration of US President Donald Trump, argued before the conservative-dominated Supreme Court that it should be shielded from state lawsuits since the EPA approved the sale of Roundup to consumers and farmers without any warnings.

The US Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) "demands uniformity and expressly preempts state labeling requirements," Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in the majority opinion, reversing the judgment of the Missouri Court of Appeals.

The EPA review "critically evaluates the pesticide's label to ensure that the label contains all warnings necessary to protect human health," the majority said. "And after EPA decides the appropriate warnings for a pesticide's label, a manufacturer is legally required to use that label unless and until EPA subsequently approves or requires a new label."

But Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, in a dissent joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, said the majority had misread the federal statute, arguing that the EPA's approval of a pesticide's label does not affect FIFRA's prohibition on misbranding pesticides.

The statute "does not treat as infallible the EPA's judgement as to whether FIFRA's midbranding provision has been violated," she wrote.

The court "misunderstands FIFRA's requirement, misinterprets the scope of FIFRA's preemption and ultimately leaves Durness without a remedy for the significant harms he has suffered."

...