The Washington Post offers tips on how to keep your EV battery running in frigid temperatures. The link at the end of this graf is supposed to be a "gift link" (from me, Marie Burns, the giftor!), meaning that non-subscribers can read the article. Hope it works: https://wapo.st/3u8Z705
Thursday
Jun272024
The Conversation -- June 27, 2024
Oklahoma. Sarah Mervosh of the New York Times: “Oklahoma’s state superintendent on Thursday directed all public schools to teach the Bible, including the Ten Commandments, in an extraordinary move that blurs the lines between religious instruction and public education. The superintendent, Ryan Walters, who is a Republican, described the Bible as an 'indispensable historical and cultural touchstone' and said it must be taught in certain grade levels.... Mr. Walters, a former history teacher who served in the cabinet of Gov. Kevin Stitt [R] before being elected state superintendent in 2022, has emerged as a lightning rod of conservative politics in Oklahoma and an unapologetic culture warrior in education.... Stacey Woolley, the president of the school board for Tulsa Public Schools, which Mr. Walters has threatened to take over, said she had not received specific instructions on the curriculum, but believed it would be 'inappropriate' to teach students of various faiths and backgrounds excerpts from the Bible alone, without also including other religious texts.”
Alan Feuer of the New York Times: “The federal judge overseeing ... Donald J. Trump’s classified documents case said on Thursday that she intended to look anew at a hugely consequential legal victory that prosecutors won last year and that served as a cornerstone of the obstruction charges filed against Mr. Trump. In her ruling, the judge, Aileen M. Cannon, said she would hold a hearing to reconsider another judge’s decision to allow prosecutors to pierce the attorney-client privilege of one of Mr. Trump’s lawyers under what is known as the crime-fraud exception. That provision allows the government to get around the normal protections afforded to a lawyer’s communications with a client if it can prove that legal advice was used to commit a crime. Depending on how Judge Cannon ultimately rules, her decision to redo the fraught and lengthy legal arguments about the crime-fraud exception could deal a serious blow to the obstruction charges in the indictment of Mr. Trump.” ~~~
~~~ Marie: Let me say this about that. That "other judge" who ruled that the crime-fraud exception applied was Beryl A. Howell, then Washington’s chief federal judge; IOW, one of the top jurists in the nation. Howell has had a long, varied and distinguished career in law and government. And Little Miss Aileen is planning to overrule her.
MSNBC is reporting on-air that the Court released the Idaho abortion decision today, and as far as quick readers have determined, it's identical to the document leaked yesterday. This WashPo story by Ann Marimow seems to confirm that, so see yesterday's Conversation for discussion of the decision and dissents.
Justin Jouvenal & Ann Marimow of the Washington Post: “A divided Supreme Court on Thursday invalidated the Securities and Exchange Commission’s use of in-house legal proceedings to discipline those it believes have committed fraud — a blow to the federal agency in one of several cases this term challenging the power of the executive branch. Like other agencies, the SEC sometimes relies on internal tribunals with administrative law judges, rather than federal courts, to bring enforcement actions in securities fraud cases or other matters.” MB: It appears this report needs some updating.
David Ovalle & Justin Jouvenal of the Washington Post: “The Supreme Court on Thursday blocked a controversial proposed Purdue Pharma bankruptcy plan that would have provided billions of dollars to help address the nation’s opioid crisis in exchange for protecting the family that owns the company from future lawsuits.” MB: This report also requires updating.
Justin Jouvenal of the Washington Post: “The Supreme Court dealt a blow to the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulation of air quality on Thursday, putting on hold a major initiative to improve public health by reducing smog-forming pollution from power plants and factories that blows across state lines. The decision is the third time in as many years that the court’s conservative majority has sharply curtailed the EPA’s power to regulate pollution, following rulings in 2022 and 2023 that targeted the agency’s ability to limit greenhouse gases and protect wetlands from runoff. In this year’s case, a divided court sided 5-4 with states, trade associations and companies that asked for a pause on the agency’s ambitious 'good neighbor' plan as they challenge it in a lower court. The way the decision was made was notable: The justices took up the case on an emergency basis while it is still playing out in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Usually, the high court waits for proceedings to finish in lower courts before taking up such challenges. That move angered liberal justices and environmentalists, who questioned what was so urgent when the regulations do not go into effect until mid-2026.”
~~~~~~~~~~
Marie: For the past two days, I've been having lots of trouble with the site loading properly; I don't know if you are, too. I've asked Squarespace to correct the problem. In any event, please make sure you save your comments before you submit them, so they if there's a fail, you can resubmit.
Nick Miroff of the Washington Post: “The number of migrants crossing the U.S. southern border illegally has dropped more than 40 percent in the three weeks since President Biden announced broad restrictions on asylum claims, administration officials said Wednesday. U.S. agents have taken fewer than 2,400 migrants into custody per day over the past week, down from more than 3,800 at the beginning of June, according to the latest Department of Homeland Security data. That is the lowest level of illegal crossings since Biden took office, DHS said.” MB: A report coming on the eve of the debate that should piss off Trump.
** David Smith of the Guardian: “Joe Biden has moved to correct a 'great injustice' by pardoning thousands of US veterans convicted over six decades under a military law that banned gay sex. The presidential proclamation, which comes during Pride month and an election year, allows LGBTQ+ service members convicted of crimes based solely on their sexual orientation to apply for a certificate of pardon that will help them receive withheld benefits.... 'Despite their courage and great sacrifice, thousands of LGBTQ+ service members were forced out of the military because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Some of these patriotic Americans were subject to court-martial, and have carried the burden of this great injustice for decades,' [Biden said in a statement].... [The President's proclamation] grants clemency to service members convicted under Uniform Code of Military Justice article 125 – which criminalised sodomy, including between consenting adults – between 1951 and 2013, when it was rewritten by Congress.” Thanks to RAS for the link. The New York Times story is here. (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Marie: So far, Biden's proclamation hasn't received a ton of press. The story is way down the NYT's online front page. Biden's proclamation does not automatically grant clemency & veterans' benefits in individual cases; as the Times story notes, “People who want their convictions overturned can now apply online for a certificate of clemency, which would help them receive benefits that may have been denied.” So if you know someone you think may be eligible for clemency & military benefits as a result of Biden's proclamation, please give them a heads-up. It strikes me that many of those who are due benefits are elderly, and we probably owe some of them hundreds of thousands of dollars. They'll need help getting what's due, although it isn't clear yet how this whole process (and it will be a “whole process”) will work.
Revenge of the Nitwits. Catie Edmondson of the New York Times: “House Republicans on Wednesday advanced legislation that would slash funding for the Department of Justice and U.S. attorneys’ offices across the country, the latest attempt by the G.O.P. to punish federal law enforcement agencies that they claim have been weaponized against conservatives, especially ... Donald J. Trump. The spending bill, approved along party lines by a subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, would cut funding for salaries and other expenses at the Justice Department by 20 percent, and for U.S. attorneys’ offices by 11 percent.... The policies being advanced this year are ... dead on arrival. But in the interim, ahead of a September funding deadline and the November elections, House G.O.P. leaders are again loading the spending bills with hard-right measures in an effort to delight their ultraconservative core supporters and placate the most conservative members of their conference.”
Another Chaotic Day at One First Street NE
** Oops! John Fritze of CNN: “The Supreme Court appears poised to allow abortions in medical emergencies in Idaho, Bloomberg News reported Wednesday, citing a document that was inadvertently posted on the court’s website in an astonishing breach of protocol. The opinion showed that a majority of the court agreed to dismiss the appeal, according to Bloomberg, which reported that it reviewed a copy of the opinion. The release was a stunning development at the Supreme Court, which usually safeguards the release of its opinions. The abortion case was considered among the most significant of the current term that is winding down ahead of the July 4 holiday.... A dismissal would let stand an opinion from the full 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals that sided with the Biden administration in the case. Such a ruling is a win for the Biden administration and will be a relief to Idaho women who fear medical complications from their pregnancies could jeopardize their hea[l]th.... The release of the opinion marks the second time a major decision dealing with an abortion controversy.” (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Abbie VanSickle of the New York Times: “It was unclear whether the document was final and a spokeswoman for the court declined to confirm what had been posted to its website.... According to Bloomberg, which did not immediately post the document online, the ruling indicated that a majority of the court had agreed to dismiss the case as 'improvidently granted.'” (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Alice Ollstein & Josh Gerstein of Politico: “According to the posted opinion, four justices dissented from the court’s decision to dismiss the Idaho dispute: conservatives Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Neil Gorsuch and liberal Ketanji Brown Jackson.... Jackson ... said the high court was wrong to back away from resolving the case. 'We cannot simply wind back the clock to how things were before the Court injected itself into this matter,' she wrote. 'It is too little, too late for the Court to take a mulligan and just tell the lower courts to carry on as if none of this has happened. As the old adage goes: The Court has made this bed so now it must lie in it.... Today’s decision is not a victory for pregnant patients in Idaho. It is delay,' Jackson added.” (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Marie: Looks like John Roberts has lost the plot. The so-called Roberts Court is a flaming disaster. ~~~
~~~ Ian Millhiser of Vox: "Assuming that the leaked document resembles the Court’s final decision, a majority of the justices have decided not to decide the Moyle case. Though the Court has seemingly splintered into four separate concurring and dissenting opinions, none of which garnered a majority of the justices’ support, five justices apparently decided that the Court was wrong to take up this case using an expedited process that bypassed an intermediate appeals court.... The primary effect of the decision, assuming it closely resembles the leaked draft, will likely be to punt the final resolution of this case until after the election. That means that patients outside of Idaho — who may have been hoping a decision in this case would set a precedent requiring ER doctors across the country to follow the federal law requiring care in the event of an emergency — may not be able to obtain abortion care that they need to save their life or to ward off very serious health consequences." ~~~
~~~ Scott Lemieux in LG&$: "Looks like Roberts will have to pretend to run another investigation to find the real leaker[.]... I agree that the decision to temporarily prevent Idaho from nullifying federal law to impose abortion bans in particular bad and unpopular cases without holding without yet determining the question on the merits is very politically convenient[.]... Kagan concurred in part in order to note that Sam Alito (dissenting with Thomas and Gorsuch) is once again being a lawless psycho[.]" ~~~
~~~ Maya Boddie of AlterNet: "Slate senior writer Mark Joseph Stern, speaking with MSNBC's Joy Reid..., suggested that Chief Justice John Roberts is likely behind the delayed timing of the [Idaho] opinion's official release. 'The idea that John Roberts is timing these cases — he's timing cases to not hurt Donald Trump's chance to become president,' Reid said. 'I think that's absolutely a possibility,' Stern said. 'I think it could also be true that [Justices] Sam Alito or Clarence Thomas is dragging out a dissent behind the scenes to help run out the clock for Donald Trump's immunity case. Each extra day that the court doesn't rule is another day that Donald Trump doesn't have to face trial, or evidentiary hearings, or be subject to discovery. but this case reeks of John Roberts."
~~~ And Now Hear This (as RAS puts it, "Making bribery great again again"): ~~~
The question in this case is whether [federal statute] §666 also makes it a crime for state and local officials to accept gratuities — for example, gift cards, lunches, plaques, books, framed photos, or the like — that may be given as a token of appreciation after the official act. The answer is no. -- Brett Kavanaugh, decision in Snyder v. United States
Snyder’s absurd and atextual reading of the statute is one only today’s Court could love. -- Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissent dissing the majority ~~~
~~~ Sometimes a Bribe Is Just a ... Perfectly Innocent Gratuity. Lindsay Whitehurst of the AP: “The Supreme Court overturned the bribery conviction of a former Indiana mayor on Wednesday, the latest in a series of decisions narrowing the scope of federal public corruption law. The high court’s 6-3 opinion along ideological lines found the law criminalizes bribes given before an official act, not rewards handed out after. 'Some gratuities can be problematic. Others are commonplace and might be innocuous,' Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote.... The high court sided with James Snyder, a Republican who was convicted of taking $13,000 from a trucking company after prosecutors said he steered about $1 million worth of city contracts to the company. In a sharply worded dissent joined by her liberal colleagues, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said the distinction between bribes and gratuities ignores the wording of the law aimed at rooting out public corruption.” (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ Abbie VanSickle & Adam Liptak of the New York Times: “The 6-to-3 ruling, which split along ideological lines, was the latest in a series of decisions cutting back federal anti-corruption laws. Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, writing for a conservative majority, said that the question in the case was whether federal law makes it a crime for state and local officials to accept such gratuities after the fact. He wrote, 'The answer is no.'... The majority explained that the law typically makes a distinction between bribes — payments made or agreed to before a government action to influence the outcome — and gratuities — payments made after a government action to reward or thank the public official.” ~~~
~~~ Here's the opinion & dissent, via the Court. ~~~
~~~ Ian Millhiser of Vox: "The Supreme Court rules that state officials can engage in a little corruption, as a treat.... The decision in Snyder is narrow. It does not rule that Congress could not ban gratuities. It simply rules that this particular statute only reaches bribes. That said, the Court’s Republican majority also has a long history of imposing constitutional limits on the government’s ability to fight corruption and restrict money in politics. It’s also notable that neither Justice Clarence Thomas nor Justice Samuel Alito, both of whom have accepted expensive gifts from politically active Republican billionaires, recused themselves from the case. Thomas and Alito both joined Kavanaugh’s opinion...."
~~~ Marie: Anyhow, good news for Bribable Bob, the New Jersey Senator with gold bars in the closet and stashes of cash in his jacket pockets -- all previously owned by a fellow for whom Bob performed extraordinary constituent services. Of course, Bob is a Democrat, so maybe O'Kavanaugh, et al., won't be so anxious to help him out.
Adam Liptak of the New York Times: “The Supreme Court handed the Biden administration a major practical victory on Wednesday, rejecting a challenge to its contacts with social media platforms to combat what administration officials said was misinformation. The court ruled that the states and users who had challenged the contacts had not suffered the sort of direct injury that gave them standing to sue. The decision, by a 6 to 3 vote, left fundamental legal questions for another day.... 'The plaintiffs, without any concrete link between their injuries and the defendants’ conduct, ask us to conduct a review of the yearslong communications between dozens of federal officials, across different agencies, with different social-media platforms, about different topics,' Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the majority.... Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil M. Gorsuch, dissented.” (Also linked yesterday.)
See yesterday's Comments for some excellent contributions, particularly on Clarence Thomas' warped views of American history. Patrick writes, in part: "At the time (1787) that the 2nd Amendment was aborning, a very large percentage of the American 'natural aristocracy' were not keen on the idea of the hoi polloi having the right to carry weapons in organized groups on the streets of NYC, Philly, Boston, etc. But in the western states, many of those lesser folk knew that they needed Ol' Bessie to protect hearth, home and their scalps in many cases. So you got the 2nd which in a way says 'OK, you can have guns at home so that you can meet your obligation to be in the militia, and the Federal government has to let you have them. But according to Article 1 Section 8, the US Congress has the authority to organize, arm and discipline those militias.'" ~~~
~~~ Marie: Further to Patrick's point, my recollection is that in many early American communities, the guns and ammo were kept under lock and key in the charge of local authorities, who distributed them to the members of the militias when need arose and collected them again when the emergency ended. Also in yesterday's Comments, laura h. pointed us to a Substack essay by Heather Cox Richardson, who addressed the post WWII mythology of the American West: that "
“... a true American was an individualist man who worked hard to provide for and to protect his homebound wife and children, with a gun if necessary, and wanted only for the government to leave him and his business alone. The cowboy image dominated television in the years after the Supreme Court’s 1954 Brown v. Board decision, first with shows like Bonanza, Gunsmoke, and Rawhide showing cowboys imposing order on their surroundings and then, by 1974, with Little House on the Prairie showing a world in which 'Pa' Ingalls — played by the same actor who had played Little Joe from Bonanza — was a doting father who provided paternal care and wholesome guidance to his wife and daughters. But that image was never based in reality.”
~~~ If you find this hard-right portrait surprising coming out of "liberal" Hollywood, bear in mind that (1) "liberal" Hollywood was (and is) a business, and as such it catered to its audience -- and to its Congressional overlords; and (2) "liberal" Hollywood was (and is) radically authoritarian and patriarchal: forcing actors into signing stifling studio contracts and employing the casting couch are not myths.
Presidential Race
Deadline lists options for watching the presidential debate. MB: The article doesn't mention it, but I imagine major print media also will air the debate live on their front pages, so you won't have to be a subscriber to watch there. Also, if you're on the road, I expect your local public radio station as well as Sirius will carry the debate live.
Hannah Knowles of the Washington Post: “There is no evidence that [President] Biden has used or plans to use performance-enhancing drugs. But Trump and his supporters have spread the baseless claim widely, as some Republicans worry openly that the bar for Biden’s performance Thursday has been set too low.... Democrats suggest Trump is trying to preempt a disconnect between the energetic Biden who will show up onstage and the 'brain-dead zombie' that Trump’s campaign has portrayed at every turn.”
Marie: I don't often link to polls, but here's a chilling reality chek: ~~~
~~~ Quinnipiac Poll: "... Trump has a slight lead over Biden 49 - 45 percent in a head-to-head matchup, according to a Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pea-ack) University national poll of registered voters released today. This is a small change from Quinnipiac University's May 22 poll when the race was too close to call with Biden receiving 48 percent support and Trump receiving 47 percent support.... More than 7 in 10 voters (73 percent) think it is likely that they will watch the televised debate between Biden and Trump on Thursday...." MB: Bear in mind that Biden has to win the popular vote by about 10 points to be assured an Electoral College win.
Ha Ha. House Speaker Mike Johnson tipped his big toe into the reality stream and told CNN that "No one expects Joe Biden will be on cocaine" during the presidential debate. He opined that Donald Trump & other were joking when they said Biden would be using performance-enhancing drugs. MB: I'll admit I find Johnson to be a fairly amazing guy. He would have you believe he is so in the tank for Jesus and the MAGA Messiah that he must be delusional, yet he manages to occasionally communicate on quite a rational level with some Democrats & MSM personalities. (Also linked yesterday.)
Amy Gardner, et al., of the Washington Post: “In five battleground states, county-level officials have tried to block the certification of vote tallies — which election experts worry is a test run for trying to thwart a Biden victory.... Trump has stated plainly that the only way he can lose this fall is if Democrats cheat. His campaign and the Republican National Committee are spending historic sums building 'election integrity' operations in key battleground states, preparing to challenge results in court, and recruiting large armies of grass-roots supporters to monitor voting locations and counting facilities and to serve as poll workers. Certification of local results is a key target in this effort....”
How Ignorant Are Voters? Well, There's This: ~~~
~~~ Colby Itkowitz, et al., of the Washington Post: “In six swing states that Biden narrowly won in 2020, a little more than half of voters classified as likely to decide the presidential election say threats to democracy are extremely important to their vote for president, according to a poll by The Washington Post and the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University. Yet, more of them trust Trump to handle those threats than Biden. And most believe that the guardrails in place to protect democracy would hold even if a dictator tried to take over the country.” Emphasis added. (Also linked yesterday.) ~~~
~~~ And This. Claire Miller, et al., of the New York Times (May 15): “Nearly one in five voters in battleground states says that President Biden is responsible for ending the constitutional right to abortion, a new poll found, despite the fact that he supports abortion rights and that his opponent Donald J. Trump appointed three Supreme Court justices who made it possible to overturn Roe v. Wade. Trump supporters and voters with less education were most likely to attribute responsibility for abortion bans to Mr. Biden, but the misperception existed across demographic groups.” (Also linked yesterday.)
Meet the Migrants. Washington Post reporters have mapped out where migrants to the U.S. are from and where they've settled. “A Washington Post analysis of more than 4.1 million U.S. immigration court records from the past decade reveals a population that was once overwhelmingly Mexican and Central American but has in recent years spanned the globe. Far fewer migrants have gotten into the country than have been apprehended at the border, the data shows. And those who cleared that first hurdle — and are still facing possible deportation in the courts — have fanned out into every U.S. state.” The maps include an interactive county-by-county map of the U.S., which summarizes who has moved from what country to what U.S. county. If you have a WashPo subscription, it's worth checking out.
Ruth Graham of the New York Times: “The Episcopal Church elected its youngest top leader since the 18th century at the denomination’s national meeting in Louisville, Ky., on Wednesday. Bishop Sean Rowe of the Diocese of Northwestern Pennsylvania, 49, was elected to a nine-year term as presiding bishop from a slate of five candidates. Bishop Rowe also serves as bishop provisional of the Diocese of Western New York. Bishop Rowe will succeed Bishop Michael Curry, who emphasized evangelism, racial justice, and the power of love in his tenure as the denomination’s first Black presiding bishop.”
~~~~~~~~~~
Bolivia. Julie Turkewitz, et al., of the New York Times: “A top general and allied members of the military tried to storm the presidential palace in Bolivia on Wednesday, before quickly retreating in an apparently failed attempt at a coup. Hours later, the general was taken into custody on live TV. Video on Bolivian television showed security forces in riot gear occupying the main square in the administrative capital, La Paz, a camouflaged military vehicle ramming a palace door and soldiers trying to make their way into the building. Then, just as quickly as they had appeared, the general, Juan José Zuñiga, disappeared, and his supporters in the armed forces pulled back and were replaced by police officers supporting the country’s democratically elected president, Luis Arce. Mr. Arce ventured onto the plaza after calling on Bolivians 'to organize and mobilize against the coup and in favor of democracy.'” The AP's report is here.
Israel/Palestine, et al. The New York Times' live updates of developments Thursday in the Israel/Hamas war are here.
U.K. Friends in High Places. Mark Landler of the New York Times: “If Sir Keir Starmer [-- leader of Britain's Labour party --] is swept into 10 Downing Street in the general election next week, as polls suggest he will be, he may end up more politically in sync with [King] Charles [than] the last two Conservative prime ministers, Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss, whose terms have overlapped with the king’s reign. On issues including climate change, housing, immigration and Britain’s relations with the European Union, experts say, Mr. Starmer is likely to find common ground with a king who holds longstanding, often fervent, views on those issues but is constitutionally barred from taking any role in politics.... If elected prime minister, Mr. Starmer would hold a weekly meeting with Charles.... People who know Buckingham Palace and Downing Street said they could foresee a fruitful relationship between the 75-year-old monarch and the 61-year-old lawyer, who was knighted for his services to criminal justice as director of public prosecutions.”
Share Article
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.
Reader Comments (18)
Confessions of a Wimp
I watch a lot of mystery/detective shows on the teevee. What I enjoy about them is the mystery parts; not the nearly-obligatory protagonist-in-danger parts. In fact, for years, as soon as the ominous music begins, I just fast-forward through the next few minutes to a point I think the danger posed will have been resolved.
Now, tonight, comes an event that could pose one of the greatest real dangers in my lifetime.
So I'll approach this real danger in a manner consistent with the way I treat fake danger. That is, as cheery as I've been about how to watch the debate, I probably won't be watching live.
NYT reporters will be liveblogging the debate, so I might turn off the sound and follow the paper's liveblog. But unless I see some indication that (1) security is about to carry Trump off the stage in handcuffs, or (2) medics are about to carry Trump away in a straightjacket, I won't be watching live with sound.
2nd attempt.
@Marie: Not to worry. Trump's allies are urging him not to be a
'raging asshole' at the upcoming debate.
Will that work? It's in his DNA. Once a raging asshole, always a
raging asshole.
https://www.rolingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-allies-
urge-raging-asshole-debate-12350469921/
Testing. Testing. Testing.
@ Marie
Your post brought this likely flawed memory to mind.
The opening lines from Fritz Leiber's "The Big Time, " a wonderful but I'd guess largely forgotten sf novel from the late 1950's or early 60's.
"My name is Greta Forzane. Eighteen and a party girl would describe me."
When it comes to tonight's debate, my tale could start something like this. My name is Ken Winkes. Seventy eight and wimpy, too, would describe me.
Very disturbing times.....
Someone on MSNBC yesterday pointed out that the anti-corruption statute used against the Indiana mayor said that one couldn't receive gifts or Rewards for their services. Rewarding someone for a scam well done after the fact was clearly considered by Congress when they wrote the bill. So once again these Supremes ignore that black letter of the law.
Guess this one was an "emergency" unlike a piddling decision about absolute presidential immunity. No hurry. We can wait on that one.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/06/27/supreme-court-epa-air-quality-regulation/
Time for another memory.
It took a while, but Senator Roman Hruska got his wish.
Wikipedia:
"In 1970, Hruska addressed the Senate, urging it to confirm Richard Nixon's nomination of G. Harrold Carswell to the Supreme Court. Responding to criticism that Carswell had been a mediocre judge, Hruska argued:
Even if he were mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren't they, and a little chance? We can't have all Brandeises, Frankfurters and Cardozos.[11]"
It gave me the fantods when he said it. Now I have them every day.
That Senate rejected Carswell...
Okay, none of my posts are showing up…
Well that one did…
Try again…
“That move angered liberal justices and environmentalists, who questioned what was so urgent when the regulations do not go into effect until mid-2026.”
The question regarding why the Traitor “justices” moved preemptively to bigfoot a lower court that had yet to issue a ruling must certainly be rhetorical given the fact that they (the Treason Lovers) saw yet another opportunity to garrote what they and their extreme right, democracy hating cohort considers the inexcusable and “illegal” ability of government entities to regulate corporations dedicated to making money while endangering the health and lives of American citizens.
In fact, the most adamant haters of governmental regulation, Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch, joined in this decision by all the wingers, including the pusillanimous quisling and sorry, sad sack loser Chief, company man, little Johnny Roberts, likely chose this case which deals with clear and undeniable baleful effects on the health of Americans in order to say “We don’t give a shit if you fuckers die. We are in charge. Our mentors and billionaire benefactors pay us to shove it up your asses, so try and stop us. Bwah-ha-ha!…Oh Harlan, is that private jet ready for our trip to the Bahamas?”
Elections do matter. Have you guys seen who Leonard Leo wants Trump to appoint to this increasingly criminal and unconstitutional court? They’d make WWII era Nazi judges look like Solomon and Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm.
Nope. Nothing more than a line or two. I’m not quite that succinct.
@Akhilleus: You got spammed. Four times. Looks like the same comment each time. So I put up one of the four.
On Supremes week, I'm remembering Kate Madison, whose constant admonition was "Remember the Supremes!"
Smart lady.
"Supreme Court Republicans: it’s presumptively unconstitutional for government to work
BY SCOTT LEMIEUX
The Supreme Court today upended more than 150 years of precedent to hold invent the right to a jury trial for those subject to civil penalties from administrative government.
The overturning of the public right doctrine means that it would require an enormous increase in funding to allow for jury trials to enforce many federal regulations, something that is not going to happen and of course this is the entire point. And Sotomayor’s point about how the is the arrogation of power into the judiciary flying under the false flag of protecting the separation of powers is entirely accurate."
The only video with sound I would like to see from tonight is Trump storming off the stage after Biden slips a few barbs under that toilet paper thin skin of his. How about "I thought we'd be doing these on Wednesdays. You'd be free and then could sleep in on Thursday" for a starter?
Stuff still disappearing. I’m thinking Square Space has become Quare Bungle Rye Space (apologies to the Dubliners, the Clancys, etc.).
@Akhilleus: This time, you didn't get spammed. Your comments must have been "disappeared," something I've been experiencing with my attempted updates a lot the past few days. However, I've learned to copy most of what I do because Quare Bungle Rye Space is so fucking unreliable.
Marie,
Crap! And I sent you guys the secret cure for cancer, but I didn’t copy it anywhere and now it’s gone.
Something else that’s gone…me from watching that “debate”. It’s ridiculous. I only watched for ten minutes but in that time Trump must have spewed 75 lies: whoppers! But there’s no fact checking here so he gets away with saying anything he likes. Biden, sticking to facts and truth is screwed from the get go.
Trump seems like Doc Ronny has given him a big shot in his fat ass of something. He’s ranting.
The whole thing is stupid. When one guy gets to make shit up on the fly and the other guy is dealing in facts, who cares about fact checks later?
Couldn’t watch any more.