Criteria for the answers I have added. I may interpret answers others have added and write my interpretations here as well:
Mass deportations: Will resolve yes if mass deportations happen in Trump's second term. None of the actions from Trump's first term would count for this market.
Supreme Court packing: Will resolve yes if, at any point during Trump's term, the Supreme Court has more than nine justices. Temporary appointments will count as a justice for the purposes of this market. If more than nine justices are not in the Supreme Court at any point during Trump's term, this market will resolve to no.
Prohibiting or restricting transgender care for adults: This will resolve yes if, at any point, transgender care for adults is restricted to prohibited. For example, if a law is passed prohibiting the purchase or use of HRT for transgender care for adults, this would resolve yes. Any action intended to only impact minors will not count.
End Russo-Ukranian war in 90 days: If the Russo-Ukrainian war is ended within 90 days of his inauguration, this market will resolve to yes. Otherwise, it will resolve to no.
RFK Jr. gets cabinet position or position in any public health department: If Robert Francis Kennedy Jr. gets a cabinet position or position in any federal public health department, the market will resolve to yes. For example, a position in the FDA, CDC, or HHS would count.
Flag desecration prohibition passed: Trump has said that he wants anyone burning the flag to get one year in jail. If any laws prohibiting the desecration of the flag are passed, this market will resolve to yes. Executive orders would also count for this market.
Clarification (1/29/2025): Executive Orders or laws that are instantly blocked, ruled as unenforceable, etc., e.g. by courts, will still count for a yes resolution.
22nd amendment repealed or interpreted to only apply to consecutive terms: If the 22nd amendment is repealed or interpreted to only apply to consecutive terms, (e.g. a Supreme Court decision rules that Trump can serve for a third term under those grounds) this market will resolve to yes. Otherwise, it will resolve to no.
Any vaccines banned for any group of people: If any vaccines are banned for any group of people, this market will resolve to yes. For example, if RFK Jr. bans covid vaccines for all children, this market will resolve to yes. Laws requiring anyone to apply for permission by the government, or enroll in a waiting period for vaccines will also count. Vaccines must be able to be generally gotten by simply walking into a clinic or making a same-day appointment as currently regularly happens. Laws requiring, for example, that parents must consent for or be informed of their minor children's vaccinations will not be considered a ban. However, laws requiring consent from minors for vaccines will count. This is because this would likely result in infant vaccinations being effectively banned, due to it being impossible for an infant to consent to vaccinations, as well as many children refusing to be vaccinated simply because they are scared of needles.
J6er pardoned: If any January 6 insurrectionist is pardoned by Trump, this market will resolve to yes. Otherwise, it will resolve to no.
Trump impeached: If Trump is impeached at any point in his term, this market will resolve to yes. Otherwise, it will resolve to no. Any impeachments of Trump will count as long as they happen in his second term, even if the grounds of them are on actions that were not committed in Trump's second term. If Trump is impeached, this market shall immediately resolve yes; conviction from the Senate is not required.
Update 2025-01-28 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Flag desecration prohibition passed:
Executive Orders or laws that are instantly blocked, ruled as unenforceable, etc., e.g. by courts, will still count for a yes resolution.
If a flag desecration prohibition is passed, it counts regardless of any takebacks or rulings of illegality or unconstitutionality later.
Update 2025-03-05 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Local and State Vaccine Bans Clarification:
Local and state bans on vaccines for any group of people will count towards a yes resolution.
Update 2025-03-05 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): State and Local Actions Clarification:
All Markets: Unless otherwise specified, state and local actions will count towards the resolution criteria for every market.
This applies to any criteria not explicitly limited to federal actions.
Update 2025-03-05 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Vaccine Ban Clarification:
The original intent was for only federal bans on vaccines for any group of people to count.
Local and State Bans will now count toward a yes resolution.
This update overrides the initial federal-only criterion.
1,000People are also trading
I think that "coup attempt in the United States" should resolve to YES if the executive branch ignores a court order, the court sanctions it, and the sanctions are not enforced.
If that occurs - and I believe that will happen within one to two weeks - then the United States has ended its democracy.
@SteveSokolowski Weren't you scared of discussing US politics online, even going so far as to close all your political markets?
@ProjectVictory That's not what I said.
I said that I support Trump, and that it is inappropriate to bet against him on the specific market that was closed - whether he would complete his term or not.
Not gonna lie, if I would have thought to point it out in the rules beforehand, I probably would have said that only Federal bans would count. That was kinda the intent, honestly. But since I gave Marnix an unfavorable clarification last time, and the market was very low-volume, I think it's fair to give him/her a favorable one. Makes it a bit more interesting tracking down and researching local ban efforts, anyway.
@Mana this might be much more likely than people are thinking. https://who13.com/news/politics/iowa-politics/iowa-bill-that-bans-administrating-mrna-vaccines-advances-out-of-subcommittee/
@Marnix I really should have thought about whether the ban had to be federal or not when creating the rules. What do you guys think?
@Marnix To be honest, I originally meant it to mean the federal government blocking vaccines for any group of people. But since you bought and after thinking this would be more fun, I've clarified for this interpretation.
@Mana He emphasized that his focus is on transgender children in the recent speech.
"Stories like this are why, shortly after taking office, I signed an executive order banning public schools from indoctrinating our children with transgender ideology. I also signed an order to cut off all taxpayer funding to any institution that engages in the sexual mutilation of our youth. And now, I want Congress to pass a bill permanently banning and criminalizing sex changes on children and forever ending the lie that any child is trapped in the wrong body. This is a big lie. And our message to every child in America is that you are perfect exactly the way God made you."
@Shai Yeah I don't think he will target adults with this, although arguably it already happened, with 18-year-olds. See my comment below on why I thought it shouldn't count, but it was a tough decision and neither view is crazy.
While we're at it, I've just clarified the flag desecration market and edited the description. This is the clarification:
Executive Orders or laws that are instantly blocked, ruled as unenforceable, etc., e.g. by courts, will still count for a yes resolution.
Essentially, if it gets passed, it counts, regardless of any takebacks or rulings of illegality or unconstitutionality etc. later.
Trump's blatantly unconstitutional ban on birthright citizenship is an example of this. If a flag desecration prohibition were passed, it would likely get instantly blocked under first amendment grounds (and rightfully so!) however a mere passing is all that is necessary despite what happens later, so the market would resolve yes.
@Mana Despite being "intended" to impact minors, Trump's recent executive order defines "minors" as anyone under 19. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-children-from-chemical-and-surgical-mutilation/
@Marnix
I have read the Executive Order. and appreciate that the rules are sufficiently ambiguous to cause a debate on whether or not it counts. I will try to write better rules next time.
However, in this case my judgement call is that no, that does not count for a yes resolution.
While this will end up impacting a few adults who are exactly 18 years old, the reason that 19 was chosen instead of 18 seems clear to me, although it was not explicitly said in the EO. It was most likely chosen to easily block interstate travel for the purpose of medical transition procedures. In Alabama and Nebraska, the age of majority is set to 19, not 18. Defining a child as 19 instead of 18 was an easy way to block interstate travel while sidestepping the explicit mention of it.
If another EO was passed that changed the age to 20 and no state had increased their age of majority to 20 before then, that would count as a yes.
Or if a blanket ban was passed, that would count as a yes.
However, since this ban seems "intended to only impact minors," with some adults who are exactly 18 in 48 states being unfortunately impacted as well due, most likely, to a desire to ban interstate travel without explicitly mentioning it, the market should not resolve to yes yet.
This is tricky edge case. I hope you can appreciate my decision and the reasons for it, even if you disagree with my call.
@Mana I was trying to make it a Plus market but apparently 1000M isn't enough, presumably bc there are more than 10 options