1. Home
  2. Detail

@userjw4i4dj1is: #مالي_خلق_احط_هاشتاقات

REEM HUSSAIN
REEM HUSSAIN
Open In TikTok:
Region: SA
Tuesday 05 August 2025 21:48:03 GMT
31
4
0
1

Music

Download

No Watermark .mp4 (0.36MB) No Watermark(HD) .mp4 (0.36MB) Watermark .mp4 (0.39MB) Music .mp3

Comments

There are no more comments for this video.
To see more videos from user @userjw4i4dj1is, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

req cmnt #mentahan #memestiktok
req cmnt #mentahan #memestiktok
what the heck, ty! 💛 follow my insta I guess lmao IG: @eddie_infante #fyp
what the heck, ty! 💛 follow my insta I guess lmao IG: @eddie_infante #fyp
Yep Roblox is cooked in August 23rd #Fyp#Roblox#August23#Myedit
Yep Roblox is cooked in August 23rd #Fyp#Roblox#August23#Myedit
Chạy chất – dáng đẹp – tiết kiệm xăng tuyệt đối! Di Bao – xe điện của thế hệ mới! #xediendibao #dibaovietnam .@DIBAO Việt Nam
Chạy chất – dáng đẹp – tiết kiệm xăng tuyệt đối! Di Bao – xe điện của thế hệ mới! #xediendibao #dibaovietnam .@DIBAO Việt Nam
Amiga si es posible mejorar la apariencia de las varices y la circulación en tus piernas 🫶🏻 Escríbeme para más info #varicesenlaspiernas #varices
Amiga si es posible mejorar la apariencia de las varices y la circulación en tus piernas 🫶🏻 Escríbeme para más info #varicesenlaspiernas #varices
California Supreme Court Clears Path for Newsom’s Mid-Decade Redistricting Bid Sacramento, August 21, 2025 – The California Supreme Court has declined to halt Governor Gavin Newsom’s proposed redistricting initiative, allowing it to move forward toward a possible special-election ballot this November. In a ruling late Wednesday, the court found that the Republican-led challenge failed to justify emergency relief under the state constitution. Democratic lawmakers are racing to pass the measure by August 22—just in time to place it on the November 4 ballot—despite objections from Republicans who argue the process violated a mandatory 30-day public review period. The proposed constitutional amendment, dubbed the Election Rigging Response Act, would temporarily suspend the authority of the independent California Citizens Redistricting Commission and allow the Legislature to redraw congressional districts for the 2026, 2028, and 2030 elections. Control would revert to the commission afterward. Background and Motivations Newsom framed the initiative as a countermove to a mid-decade redistricting push in Texas, led by GOP lawmakers and backed by President Donald Trump. That effort aims to add five Republican-leaning congressional seats. Newsom and Democrats cast their proposal as a necessary defense of fair representation in the face of partisan maneuvers. Political Reactions The political fallout has been intense. Former President Barack Obama praised the California plan as “responsible” and a temporary response to aggressive Republican redistricting elsewhere. Republican officials, by contrast, condemned the measure as a blatant power grab, violating the voter-mandated commission system established by Propositions 11 (2008) and 20 (2010). They argue the strategy bypasses essential transparency and fairness safeguards. Legislative Hearing and Public Debate A heated legislative hearing recently highlighted the sharp partisan divide. Republicans criticized the process as rushed and secretive, contending that voter funds should address pressing state issues rather than politically motivated redistricting. Democrats and allied unions defended the effort as a guard against GOP-led strategies. Estimates suggest the special election could cost over $230 million. Legal Considerations and Outlook Legal scholars note the plan runs up against California’s constitution, which specifies that redistricting authority resides with the independent commission and occurs only once every decade. Bypassing these rules would require a constitutional amendment—precisely what Newsom is pursuing—but that path faces steep legal and political hurdles. Conclusion and What Lies Ahead With the Supreme Court refusal to block legislative action, the redistricting proposal now heads to a key vote in the Legislature. If two-thirds majorities pass it, the amendment would then appear on the November 4 ballot for voters to decide. The prospect of extensive legal challenges looms, and the outcome could dramatically reshuffle California’s congressional delegation in the 2026 election. At stake are critical questions around democratic norms, representation, and the balance of power. Whether voters approve the measure—and how courts respond—will shape the political landscape well beyond this decade.
California Supreme Court Clears Path for Newsom’s Mid-Decade Redistricting Bid Sacramento, August 21, 2025 – The California Supreme Court has declined to halt Governor Gavin Newsom’s proposed redistricting initiative, allowing it to move forward toward a possible special-election ballot this November. In a ruling late Wednesday, the court found that the Republican-led challenge failed to justify emergency relief under the state constitution. Democratic lawmakers are racing to pass the measure by August 22—just in time to place it on the November 4 ballot—despite objections from Republicans who argue the process violated a mandatory 30-day public review period. The proposed constitutional amendment, dubbed the Election Rigging Response Act, would temporarily suspend the authority of the independent California Citizens Redistricting Commission and allow the Legislature to redraw congressional districts for the 2026, 2028, and 2030 elections. Control would revert to the commission afterward. Background and Motivations Newsom framed the initiative as a countermove to a mid-decade redistricting push in Texas, led by GOP lawmakers and backed by President Donald Trump. That effort aims to add five Republican-leaning congressional seats. Newsom and Democrats cast their proposal as a necessary defense of fair representation in the face of partisan maneuvers. Political Reactions The political fallout has been intense. Former President Barack Obama praised the California plan as “responsible” and a temporary response to aggressive Republican redistricting elsewhere. Republican officials, by contrast, condemned the measure as a blatant power grab, violating the voter-mandated commission system established by Propositions 11 (2008) and 20 (2010). They argue the strategy bypasses essential transparency and fairness safeguards. Legislative Hearing and Public Debate A heated legislative hearing recently highlighted the sharp partisan divide. Republicans criticized the process as rushed and secretive, contending that voter funds should address pressing state issues rather than politically motivated redistricting. Democrats and allied unions defended the effort as a guard against GOP-led strategies. Estimates suggest the special election could cost over $230 million. Legal Considerations and Outlook Legal scholars note the plan runs up against California’s constitution, which specifies that redistricting authority resides with the independent commission and occurs only once every decade. Bypassing these rules would require a constitutional amendment—precisely what Newsom is pursuing—but that path faces steep legal and political hurdles. Conclusion and What Lies Ahead With the Supreme Court refusal to block legislative action, the redistricting proposal now heads to a key vote in the Legislature. If two-thirds majorities pass it, the amendment would then appear on the November 4 ballot for voters to decide. The prospect of extensive legal challenges looms, and the outcome could dramatically reshuffle California’s congressional delegation in the 2026 election. At stake are critical questions around democratic norms, representation, and the balance of power. Whether voters approve the measure—and how courts respond—will shape the political landscape well beyond this decade.

About

Legal