If you care to have a taxonomy of what happened, Biden announced a goal to cut emissions by 2030. It didn’t include anything about how Americans’ consumption would change, so the Daily Mail more or less made some things up and threw them in an infographic. dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9…
Then that infographic got disseminated throughout the Murdoch sphere as though it was Biden’s plan. But there’s nothing in Biden’s plan about any of it. The Daily Mail p much invented it wholecloth.
They invented a policy Biden hasn’t so much as winked at, and they’re launching suicide missions in defiance of it.
Biden: “Each year on this day, we remember the lives of all those who died in the Ottoman-era Armenian genocide” whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/…
This is the first time the United States government has officially recognized the Armenian genocide.
Correx: This is the first time since the early 1980s that the US has done this. Pres. Reagan once made a reference to the Armenian genocide in a proclamation about the Holocaust. And in 1951, the State Dept cited the massacres of Armenian as genocide in a submission to the ICJ.
This notion being aggressively promoted by ABC’s political team—that Biden is betraying campaign promises by not allowing Republicans in the minority to dictate what parts of his agenda he’s allowed to do—is more doctrinaire than what you get from hardline party operatives.
What Biden said about being ‘transitional’ during the campaign, which Karl’s reel truncates pretty hilariously, was that he would be “a bridge” to a younger generation of *Democratic* politicians.
Biden’s platform was widely regarded as the most progressive of any Democratic nominee for president, thanks in large part to the committees he set up seeking unity with the supporters of the Sanders campaign.
A 5-4 shadow docket covid restriction case gets a per curiam opinion that actually makes an argument for once. Roberts voted to deny. Kagan wrote a dissent, joined by the other two liberal justices. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
The conservative majority is, as usual, big mad at the Ninth Circuit for being resolutely the Ninth Circuit.
The majority is so verbose in granting this injunction (almost 4 pages!) that the Supreme Court staff filed it on their website under “opinions of the court” rather than in the usual home of the shadow docket, “opinions relating to orders.”
Sotomayor writes that the court can’t update the Telephone Consumer Protection Act to protect telephone consumers from modern technology like Facebook’s, only Congress can. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
I recommend reading Alito’s concurrence about the uselessness of the series qualifier canon, which I find persuasive and frustrating.
It’s frustrating because, in p typical Alito fashion, when he senses that his logic is taking him somewhere doesn’t want to go, he just doesn’t apply his reasoning to the case.
This piece rests on WaPo’s attribution of the recent surge in border crossings to Biden’s policy stances as the predominant driver of events and reticence to declare the Trump practice of expelling unaccompanied minors illegal, framing it instead as a useful but abandoned measure
Unfortunately for those arguments, WaPo published a piece that included this reporting six weeks before Biden took office. washingtonpost.com/immigration/mi…
It also seems to be WaPo’s sotto voce editorial position that “hundreds of families crowded into squalid camps” just outside US territory is a policy win, whereas letting them out of those camps and beginning a legal adjudication process is a failure.