Classic Murc's law. If conservatives wanted to use 1/6 rioters discovering how awful prison is to advocate for comprehensive reform rather than to just advocate for selective impunity, they would just...do that, and nothing liberals say can make them do the former
First, you think that many fewer people should be in prison and sentences should generally be less harsh, THEN you argue that a judge should not act like a Fox News grandpa during a criminal trial, make up your minds!
Strange that during a presidential debate Trump chose to winkingly praise this summary execution rather than seize the opportunity to argue for criminal justice reform and defendant's rights
To state the obvious, “the sentencing guidelines for most crimes should be less punitive” is a criminal justice reform argument. “The sentencing guidelines should not apply to these particular defendants” is not. Guess which version 99% of 1/6 apologists are going with
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"Following the arc of Noah's writing on this subject floods me an overwhelming sense that you can say whatever the fuck you want if you're an HLS professor even if you said the exact opposite thing 17 seconds earlier" lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2021/11/leave-…
I am just a country political scientist but my view is that the bar for evaluating the Supreme Court should be set at least a weeeeee bit higher than "did not literally vote to make Donald Trump dictator"
What an absurdly chickenshit call to impact a game like that
Yup. Normally complaints that refs are "changing the outcome of the game" by making normal calls is silly. But this is actually a case of a ref drawing attention to themselves with a huge impact for no defensible reason whatsoever
"Most embarrassing Greenwald moment of the Trump years" is an impossible question to answer with dozens of candidates, but his fawning interview with that not-actually-remoreseful abusive misogynist is certainly in the running thecut.com/2020/08/why-we…
I assume that he was able to bring single-payer to Kansas as a minority backbencher though
This statement is hilariously stupid. "You have the freedom of expression, unless the university or the governor thinks what you're saying is bad, or you're being compensated for professional services" oh well that's fine then
"It is important to note that we did not deny anyone their academic freedom, we just said you cannot say or do anything that will upset Emperor DeSantis and cause his assistant to send us an angry email"
Shall we read the dissent issued today by the greatest Supreme Court nominee of the last 40 years? I think we shall. "[E]very day the Court fails to grant relief is devastating, both for individual women and for our constitutional system as a whole."
One critical point: 5CA's initial reasoning for not granting relief is not applicable to this case, and yet it stayed the District Court with no reasoning except a reference to the (now irrelevant) previous ruling!
The idea that overruling Roe would "just" "send the issue back to the states" has always been deeply misguided. Congress and/or the Court could easily make Gilead national. Among the movement that dominates the federal judiciary it's already very thinkable
(And even if it were true, pundits making the "don't worry, if Roe is overruled they won't ban abortion where *I* live can go straight to hell without passing Go in any case) prospect.org/features/men-o…