A Senate candidate in 2014 tried to point out that Republicans taking over the Senate could mean the end of Roe v Wade. He was 100% right. His reward was being relentlessly mocked by local and national reporters and narrowly losing: lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2020/10/the-pr…
I love objective journalism!
It's fair to say the Dem politicians could have done more to mobilize voters around the Court. But it's also true that the Dem politicians who actually try it have a tendency to get mocked for trying to BLACKMAIL voters by reporters disconnected from the material consequences
Gardner, who will vote to ensure that Roe is overruled later this month, won by fewer than 40,000 votes. Had the media not decided to act as his cheerleaders because his opponent had the temerity to forcefully defend reproductive rights, the race may have come out differently.
"How dare you say that our judicial nominees share the views of all elite Republicans on constitutional issues" is the most obvious con in the world but it's one of those things reporters think they have to pretend to take seriously theweek.com/articles/94353…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Step 1: when smoking gun emails make it just too embarrassing to side with the Trump administration's lawless trolling, change your mind at the last minute and bask in the media adulation for Standing Up To Trump cnn.com/2019/09/12/pol…
Step 2: lawlessly use the shadow docket to give you and Trump what they always wanted (undercounting racial minorities in the Census) without even having to explain yourself and attracting much less attention. Best of both worlds! lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2020/10/not-ev…
Yes. I think it's reasonable to assume it's less than 50/50 that it will be struck down, but it can absolutely happen with a 6-3 Court. (There's also the real risk that as with Sebelius they wreak havoc with various parts of the law without striking it down entirely.)
And that's assuming Dems have the White House/Senate. If Republicans hold the Senate -- unlikely, but certainly very possible -- foreclosing any retaliation against the Court or replacement for the ACA, all bets are off.
I've seen some takes arguing that Dems are mistaken for focusing on the ACA because it will look boy-who-cried-wolf if the ACA survives. This is really misguided: 1)Putting the fear of 13 into justices is a good thing, and 2)there will be PLENTY of outrageous decisions left...
The most important takeaway from this is that if Dems capture the Senate the filibuster needs to be gone on Day 1. No dicking around to make Republicans look unreasonable, just do it. The public doesn't care AT ALL about process, but they'll care a lot if there's a depression.
If anybody is against this, they need to be locked in a room Clockwork Orange style and watch Chuck Grassley laughing in Pat Leahy's face for keeping judicial vacancies warm for Trump on perpetual loop until they recant
I don't object to having a reconciliation-friendly proposal ready to plan for the worst, but it should be an absolute last resort. There is nothing to be gained by keeping the filibuster for a single second and immense amounts to lose. vox.com/21499869/joe-b…
The Supreme Court has issued an order allowing its partners in the Trump administration to stop the census count. Sotomayor dissents. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
The Court granted the administration's request based on the alleged need to complete the count by December 31, even though the administration is saying it will not meet the deadline no matter what!
The idea that the balance of interests favors the government is preposterous -- unless you think undercounting racial minorities is a feature, not a bug, and the five Republican nominees and Trump are on the same page there
Koch Brothers-funded McCarthyite faux outrage machine Campus Reform goes after @LDBurnett with results that would be hilarious if it wasn't for the disgracefully craven response of her college admin lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2020/10/is-mik…
The essential non-existence of an academic job market means that faculty have essentially no leverage when the leaders of their college are openly contemptuous of academic freedom, which compounds the problem
The president's response would be a immediately firable offense if Burnett had really issued a First Amendment-protected profanity-laced tirade against the vice president. But for the record this was the tweet that the president pretended to be outraged about:
All you need to know about the popularity of the Republican Party's agenda is that it is settled GOP dogma that the dirtiest trick in politics is to suggest that a Republican Supreme Court has the views of virtually all elite Republicans on a constitutional question