Open Thread: SCOTUS End of Term Releases

This is an open thread focused on Supreme Court orders and decisions released this week, the final week of the court’s term.

Check these Twitter accounts for more updates and analysis:

SCOTUS updates: – Updates

SCOTUSblog: – Analysis

Steve Vladeck: – Dedicated thread with updates and analysis

Chris Geidner: – Dedicated thread with updates and analysis

If you want to suggest any other Twitter accounts to follow for SCOTUS news and analysis, please share in comments.

~ ~ ~

Any updates will appear at the bottom of this post; please bear with any content burps as this page may be edited as the day progresses.

All comments related to the House January 6 Committee hearings should be shared in those dedicated threads, not here

To new readers and commenters: welcome to emptywheel. New commenters, please use a unique name to differentiate yourself; use the same username each time you comment.

Comment policy

Community guidelines

If you are leaving a comment, please be concise; 100 words is the optimum length.

If you are sharing active links your comment may be delayed by auto-moderation.

If contributors and moderators seem slow, it’s because they’re dealing with higher than usual volume of comments including trolling.

Caution: moderators will have much lower tolerance for trolling.

~ ~ ~


Ardoin, LA Secretary of State, et al. v. Robinson, Press, et al.

Certiorari Granted

Stay granted 6-3 by SCOTUS, essentially fucking over Black voters in Louisiana for this mid-term election by way of the shadow docket.

~ ~ ~


Oklahoma, Petitioner v. Victor Manuel Castro-Huerta

5-4 decision, Kavanaugh majority opinion, Gorsuch with dissent

Blackhawk’s next tweet encapsulates much of the problem with this particular SCOTUS iteration:

This court is not legitimate because it fails to recognize previous SCOTUS decisions, undermines fundamental human rights, and tears at democracy, while re-colonizing Native American nations without the express approval of U.S. legislature, or the re-colonized by nation, or by bodily autonomy.

It is a superlegislature supplanting the role of the legislative branch while frustrating the executive branch’s ability to fulfill functions outlined in legislation.

Given what it has already done this term, what are the odds this same court further destroys the executive branch’s long-recognized functions in its last decisions on West Virginia v. EPA and Biden v. Texas this term?

~ ~ ~


Le Roy Torres, Petitioner v. Texas Department of Public Safety

5-4 decision, Breyer majority opinion, Kagan concurring, Thomas dissent

SCOTUS finds in favor of U.S. veterans’ rights. Texas agreed upon becoming a state that its sovereignty was subordinate to federal policy; this will tweak the noses of Texas secessionists.

The disturbing part of this decision:

It’s as if the four dissenters don’t realize they’re arguing against their own legitimacy. If federal law isn’t supreme, why is their court supreme?

Or is that the point, they’re making yet another argument for states’ rights?

~ ~ ~

87 replies
  1. Rayne says:

    Just getting back to my desk, haven’t yet caught up with SCOTUS news…except to see they’re already acting like colonialists.

    • bmaz says:

      And directly overruling precedent only two years old on tribal sovereignty. All solely because Barrett replaced RBG. The second decision as to veterans rights was good though.

      • ernesto1581 says:

        Gorsuch must be feeling rather disrespected — he wrote what for him qualifies as a scorcher of a dissent on Okla v Castro-Huerta. He forgot, or maybe thought he was somehow exempt from, the fact that this court flips whatever it likes upside down whenever it seems convenient. “We faithfully undertake to observe precedent except when we don’t.”

        In other news, the Shadow Docket (sorry to personify, but it does seem to have taken on a life of its own with this court) reinstated Louisiana’s gerrymandered congressional map last night in Robinson v Ardoin.

        • OldTulsaDude says:

          B.K. should be told that the Cherokee Nation is not “part of Oklahoma” but that the state was created around the Cherokee Nation..

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          One could also say OK was created out of lands stolen from Native Americans under the Dawes, Curtis, and Burke Acts.

  2. Building Guy says:

    Except worse.

    “Originalism” is already taken. Maybe like their fundamentalist brethren, the Taliban, “Shamria-lito” law?

    Emphasis on the first syllable

    • wetzel says:

      There is an ancient conservative Christian legal tradition that goes back to Inquisition, witch burnings, and Puritanism. The current Supreme Court sees the purpose of the law differently than American Constitutional tradition. This is not originalism. The law doesn’t promote the general welfare and protect individual liberty. The purpose of law is to punish sin and purify the world. These justifications are extra-Constitutional. The court’s power is sufficient argument.

      • Bobster33 says:

        I used to call them Old Testament Christians. Seems they never read any chapters in the New Testament.

        • Fraud Guy says:

          Well, the New Testament is filled with crackpot stuff from that long-haired, peace-loving, Hispanic dude.

        • gmoke says:

          The Supreme Court has been captured not only by the Federalist Society but also by Opus Dei (and what may be its women’s auxiliary for ACB). They be into mortification for themselves and punishment for the rest of us undeserving heathens.

        • Spencer Dawkins says:

          Agreed, with the offer of a friendly amendment that they don’t seem THAT checked out on most of the Hebrew scripture/Old Testament, either … maybe the anti-gay “clobber passages, and cherry-picked rules from Exodus and Leviticus, but after that, they’re in over their heads.

      • Joe Sommer says:

        What Wetzel said. Except he should have cited the key sources: Joseph de Maistre, and Dostoevsky’s Grand Inquisitor scene.

      • Sonso says:

        The court has indicated that it doesn’t read or care about preambles or independent phrases. The court has, indeed, turned the Constitution into a suicide pact.

  3. Rugger9 says:

    Would it be possible for Congress to force SCOTUS to sign and explain their opinions to be valid with a law? I’m thinking about so many of the devastating ‘shadow docket’ opinions which had been anonymous. Such an action wouldn’t impede SCOTUS in any way except to make them own what they already decided to do.

    • Charles Wolf says:

      Probably not.
      The Court could for example just claim “separation of powers” and/or toss any such law, from its ‘shadow docket’ w/o any explanation.
      It’s like a Catch 44.

      • Bobby Gladd says:

        The Court could for example just claim “separation of powers”

        And, I’m sure Justice Alito can point us to the exact location in the Constitution where that phrase is “expressly enumerated.“


        • person1597 says:

          Or five knuckleheads with an uncontrollable urge…”Got an urge, got a surge and it’s outta control
          Got an urge I wanna purge, ’cause I’m losing control
          Uncontrollable urge I wanna tell you all about it
          Got an uncontrollable urge let me scream and shout it”…

        • mospeck says:

          the Super Maj on the SC just has to be so excited with their new and unfettered powers to rule the rock. vlad — by comparison — he has had less success and much tougher sledding (for ex take them wrong-way recalcitrant Ukrainians, or then Brittany Griner in her Jimmy Hendrix shirt, or Gen Mattis reading the Dostoyevsky, “The tragedy of our time is that Putin is a creature straight out of Dostoevsky. He goes to bed every night angry, he goes to bed every night fearful, he goes to bed every night thinking that Russia is surrounded by nightmares”
          Hell, everybody’s reading Dostoyevsky:
          “The inmates wake up, have breakfast in their cell — usually some basic food — and then go for a walk in the prison’s courtyard, which is covered by a net. The rest of the day is filled with reading books — Ms. Griner has been reading Dostoyevsky in translation, for instance — and watching television, though all of the channels are in Russian, Ms. Kalugina said.”
          But like the SC I’m still so excited because soon there’s going to be more than one rock and figure that the pressure maybe comes off a little bit after we become a space-faring civilization! (spaceX coming soon to a movie theater near you this summer). For ex see “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress” by Heinlein. Everything went swimmingly.
          I’m so excited, just sitting here watching the young girls dance. The young white pony-tail girls dancing to totally inappropriate dread-locks black girls music. You know, you get them mixed emotions– you get the enthusiasm, but then you can hardly even walk straight .. but still, you gotta appreciate those able to move about like they’re on springs or something

      • Rayne says:

        As if their actions haven’t already given birth to the idea that judicial review by SCOTUS specifically is less than legitimate.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Not when it’s the source of their jurisdiction to review and be the final arbiter of what so many laws mean.

        • OldTulsaDude says:

          What are the odds that this SCOTUS (with Thomas dissenting) will rule that the Confederate surrender was coerced, obtained under duress so the surrender is nullified and the Confederacy is re-established?

        • MB says:

          In a way, one could say that the last 150 years of American history has been a long, long-game multi-generational effort by white nationalists to overturn the results of the Civil War.

        • Tom says:

          That’s the message of Heather Cox Richardson’s 2020 book, “How the South Won the Civil War”.

        • Spencer Dawkins says:

          If we were talking about a Supreme Court able to think coherently, I’d agree, but actually, I think we’re talking about at least five justices who are trying to please people who would be FINE with dismantling every aspect of the Federal government, except the military. At the rate they’re going, how many more Supreme Court sessions do they need, before their work is done?

          After that, they can self-dismantle the court, assuming that McConnell can shut down any attempt to name replacement justices by either party, and retire. Would any of the Roe v. Wade Six stay because they need the money?

        • bmaz says:

          Ah, you seem to think the ACB Court cannot think coherently. They absolutely can, just not within norms. They know exactly what they are doing and thinking, and just do not care.

  4. Peterr says:

    With respect to the cases yet to be announced, I shudder to think of what this court will do to the executive branch’s rule-making ability in WV v EPA, especially with respect to regulating greenhouse gases. The future of the planet may be at stake.

        • Bobby Gladd says:

          Maybe they can simply decree that all references to “the Secretary” etc must be deleted from all legislation. Those are the staple phrases enabling legislative regulation. Laws tell us the “what” and “why.” Ensuing statutory regulations set forth the subsequent “who, how, where, and when.” I.e., the contents of the CFR.

          A good analogy is “policies and procedures.” Laws are ~the former, regulations are ~the latter. To the extent that federal regulations exceed the scope of the enabling legislation, they are routinely challenged, and modified or overturned. Federal regulations undergo lengthy and detailed “public review and comment“ periods prior to final publication. I’ve spent a good bit of time participating in those in a number of my jobs. EPA, NRC, DOE, OSHA, HHS, FDIC, OCC…

          Yeah, right: just rule that the legislative branch cannot delegate any statutory operational details to the executive branch, yeah, that’ll work.

          PS— Obamacare Had more than 1k references to “the secretary.” File under “be careful what you ask for.”

        • Nick Caraway says:

          So, bmaz, even as a non lawyer I have been worried about EPA v. WVA. Assuming they rule on that case as you expect, where do you think SCOTUS goes next on deregulation/ “non-delegation?” Is there any limit now?

          For example, might there be in the relatively near future a case that they can hear that would allow them to overturn NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin? Or is that just paranoid fantasy? After all, workers did not have a legally protected right to collective bargaining in 1868…

        • bmaz says:

          No idea just yet, as Peter said, kind of have to wait and see how far they go tomorrow. At a minimum it is pretty clear Chevron deference is on the chopping block and that is a bad thing that the right wing has long lusted after.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          As good neoliberals, this majority finds restraints on resource extraction and profit-taking to be illegitimate, especially when they come from a government that is supposed to subsidize them.

          It seems to be part of their belief in a 1950s white majoritarian era where God=Capitalism=Country. But generally, it prefers the Robber Baron era, and think Lochner wasn’t restrictive enough.

        • Peterr says:

          Given what happened in this past week with both Dobbs and Kennedy v Bremerton School District, I would not be surprised if the Court ruled that West Coast Hotel v Parrish improperly overturned Lochner.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          For the radical majority, the Constitution’s contract clause, like the Second Amendment, shall bear no infringement, notwithstanding that every other constitutional right is subject to limitations, famously including the First Amendment.

      • klynn says:

        Was there not a history tied to the the emissions standards? There was harm to farming, harm to forestry and logging and harm to fishing from coal burning emissions. Isn’t the SCOTUS decision a violation of the US-Canada Acid Rain Treaty?

        This will impact/violate transboundary pollution agreements I assume?

        IANAL. Just have an Environment Engineer/Scientist in the house.

        [FYI, fixed first URL removing extra character. /~Rayne]

        • Rayne says:

          Excellent question, though I wonder if the executive branch’s Constitutional authority to make treaties which have been ratified by Congress may remain outside the problem this SCOTUS has with executive branch’s Constitutional authority to rely on “each of the executive Departments.”

          IANAL, but I’m debating writing a post about the original sin Nixon may have committed — creating a quasi-independent agency into which other Departments’ functions were rolled (with Congressional assent) instead of a new Department of Environment to consolidate those functions.

    • Troutwaxer says:

      Maybe I misunderstand this, but aren’t there hundreds of thousands of Federal Regulations, affecting every industry and activity imaginable? Just how many of these regulations is the Supreme Clown Posse going to eradicate, and how will it be possible for any government to make policy afterwards?

      And if they go too far, how is anyone, regardless of whether they’re Red of Blue, going to actually run the country? And is the Supreme Court putting themselves in a situation where the only choice for the Biden Administration will be to tell the Supreme Court to get stuffed?

  5. earlofhuntingdon says:

    The Court’s radical majority is implementing an ambitious, hard-right political agenda, while it can, before death or reform limits its power. It is supremely opportunist, enacting rules without regard to the law, precedent, or any stated rationale. Because it can. Activist judging to the nth degree, exactly what the GOP routinely warns that the Democrats will do.

    A lot of people see that. I wonder if that is something Democratic leadership might consider as it crafts its legislative and campaign priorities for 2022. One item alone bears consideration. Biden should nominate and Schumer should move heaven and earth to confirm every judicial and political appointment in sight. (Durbin and his regard for blue slips might be reminded he’s not running a social club.) Should McConnell be put back in charge in 2023, he seems likely to freeze government and ratify zero Biden nominees, to own the libs, the country be damned.

  6. OldTulsaDude says:

    This SCOTUS is shredding as fast as it can the prohibitions in the establishment clause of the first amendment in its helter skelter quest to deliver as promised an oligarchic theocracy. God help us all.

    • e.a.f. says:

      “God help us all”. Mom always told us, God helps those who help themselves.

      Expect all sorts of “rights” to be taken away by the Supreme Court, unless people start voting the American Taliban out of office and new politicians start passing legislation which protects citizens rights to the right to control their own bodies, have safe water and air, etc.

      The American Supreme Court is going to gift corporations and return the average voter/citizen to some time back to the 1800s, if not before. I’m waiting for debtor’s prisons, indentured servatude.

  7. mospeck says:

    Agree SC is way off course. sry OT, but last I checked we still got a semblance of a democracy over here. Other places are way well farther off and gotta blow steam

    What about the poor Russian kid’s lost souls left wandering about in purgatory for like the next ten million years? Twenty years old, and clueless and getting themselves blown to bits in ditches by advanced Western weapon systems that don’t miss. In the end you gotta figure that God counts them up for something, those unlucky joes, the no hopers — that he rates them as counting for something. Otherwise, finding myself rooting for Russian ships to be down there in the Davy Jones locker is a really really bad karma. But right now seems like the only way we got to get through to knucklehead vlad and his new anointed slick dick silovik patrushev. Why the fuck can’t the GPS get a lock on gerisamov and dvornikov and the MLRS just do a right proper job and take care of things? So that the Russian and Ukrainian moms can get their kids back home? Or do we need another August 1917?
    short stack all in on him and really, really don’t want Alexi to accidentally fall out of a 5th story window to light things off. But figure that he’s going all in and that’s what he’s rooting for. Meanwhile Russian rocket scientists and artists are just wasting their God-given talents. They are intrinsic art-wise gifted, so im told. Read it in a book and saw it in a movie

  8. observiter says:

    Not my favorite columnist, but Maureen Dowd (NYT Opinion, 6/25/22, link below) recently wrote a decent/disturbing reflection on the Roe decision. Here’s a peek:
    “…I was there at the start of the corrosive chain of events that led to women losing control of their own bodies. I saw how America went from a beacon of modernity to a benighted outlier. Over the last three decades, I have witnessed a dismal saga of opportunism, fanaticism, mendacity, concupiscence, hypocrisy and cowardice…”

    • Vinnie Gambone says:

      Way OT, but, what about the mention about removing the MAGS, And of mention of firearms being found on people ?
      Tarrio was arrested for magazines. Was there no arrest of the dude w the AR -15 ? Were there other arrest for people who were carrying ? If arrested, who were these people ? How many ? Or was ut just, ” you cant come in here with that ?

  9. e.a.f. says:

    None of the decisions really surprised me, once it was out the court would over turn Roe vs. Wade. Some of it, such as the gerrymandering cases, are so retro, its like I’m back in the era pre 1955. But really Trump and his supporters do not favour people of colour being able to vote and they all long for the “good old days”. This is what happens when you vote for an idiot. Given the low voter turn out in the U.S.A. its about time Americans saw the light and got with the agenda and voted in all elections they can. Their lives may depend upon it.

    In Canada the Supreme Court members retire at 75 as do our Senate members. Eventually they will go. There are also requirements regarding where they come from and what their expertise has to be. At one time P.M. Harper decided to “annoint” some one, who wasn’t going to be great, but in the end he did not have the expertise in marine law, which was required for the court new member. There doesn’t seem to be any experience required to get on the American Supreme Court and lying under oath doesn’t seem to matter.

    if things don’t change with the American Supreme Court, as in new members, or removal of some for lying, things will not get better. All some one has to do next election is to take the results to the court and viola, a democrat would be out and a republican in. Disenfranchising people of colour as a political strategy is disgusting. I’m waiting for more laws in the U.S.A. to restrict voting, who knows women could be next. The Taliban has done it, why not the Surpemeos and their back up singers.

    It is so very sad this is all happening.

    • Tom says:

      I dunno, e.a.f., I’m just looking at this memo from the Dept. of People Who Live in Glass Houses and it seems we have our own problems with voter turnout here in the Great White North. There has been a decline in turnout over the last several federal elections, from 68.3% in 2015 to 67.0% in 2019 to 62.5% in 2021. Here in Ontario the turnout for this year’s provincial election was only 43%, the lowest ever recorded, and we gave Premier Doug Ford and his Progressive Conservatives a bigger majority than last time.

      As for electing idiots, let’s not forget that Doug Ford–older brother of the late notorious Toronto Mayor Rob Ford–once said he wouldn’t know Margaret Atwood if she passed him in the street and complained that Toronto has more libraries than it does Tim Horton’s. Out west, Alberta Premier and former Harper stalwart Jason Kenney has lost leadership of the United Conservative Party because Alberta conservatives think he’s not right-wingy enough. Ditto for Erin O’Toole of the federal Conservative Party, and the current frontrunner to replace him, Pierre Poilievre, thinks that the solution to Canada’s current economic problems is (WTF!) bitcoin. He’s running on a platform of “Freedom!” and “Giving back Canadians control of their lives!” and is the same guy who welcomed the Freedom Convoy to Ottawa in February. And look at the unending sex scandals in the upper ranks of the Canadian armed forces, not to mention racism and misogyny in the RCMP and the continuing tragic legacy of the residential school system. I certainly share your concerns about our good neighbour to the south, but it’s not as if we don’t have our own problems to contend with.

      • e.a.f. foster says:

        of course we have problems, but no where as many and as serious as the U.S.A. Ford 1, was mayor of Toronto, not the Prime Minister of Canada. Our nut bars are kept in the junior leagues. As to Jason, it was a tad more than him not being not right wing enough. he fxxked up majorily, like trying ot go to war with the doctors and nurses just as covid was coming up and a lot of other things. Jason just wasn’t up to the job.
        The Tories seem to be in the habit of the leader resigning if they don’t win an election. That is not a good strategy. They should have stuck with O’Toole.
        We have our share of crazies in Canada but no where as many as the U.S.A., on a prorated basis.
        Can’t remember Canada having a P.M. Like the U.S.A. had trump as pres and our Supreme Court is way more professional than the current crop the U.S.A. has. One of the important things about the Canadian Supreme Court Judges is they stay out of politics.

      • Eureka says:

        I appreciate you gathering your people, Tom — as the saying goes.

        We have grave problems everywhere, this is a(n especially Western) worldwide movement. We’re all trying to cut the rip currents, make our ways back to land and productive work (repeat, repeat, repeat). That’s a lot harder to do when carrying extra weight, getting bonked on the head as you pop up for air…

        • Eureka says:

          And a Happy Canada Day to you, eh?

          [At least I’ve not fetched a vid of Bob & Doug McKenzie. But that’s because we can all see and hear them, with Geddy Lee belting, “Take off, it’s a beauty way to go…”]

  10. observiter says:

    Anyone actually surprised that some folks lie and cheat, especially/particularly extremists and/or psychopaths who seek money and power. What better way to do this than slowly, meticulously work towards taking over the U.S. Supreme Court. Gosh, I only wish the Democrats were so clever.

    With seriousness, the challenge is how to confront such actions — successfully — without ourselves crossing the line. We knew they were in play for decades but I think no one actually believed these folks could pull it off.

  11. Eureka says:

    Excuse me for dashing in with an OT-but-related:

    Rayne, I keep meaning to FYI you for your upcoming House seats post. PA-01 is eminently flippable (Cook PVI calls the district Even, but GOP incumbent Brian Fitzpatrick, who ‘inherited’ his seat from his bro some cycles back, has more traction than that Cook call indicates; it’s complicated).

    Dem opponent Ashley Ehasz has some new polling showing that when voters are informed of Fitzpatrick’s anti-abortion-rights record, she is a +10 (17-point shift; sm. sample size, yada yada): [telling graph; thread]
    8:22 AM · Jun 27, 2022

    Abortion access is a national security issue: [QRT Defense One / article]
    5:46 PM · Jun 28, 2022

    Her campaign video — a pottymouth (in wholly appropriate fashion) to boot ;):

    “I’m Ashley Ehasz. I’m a Democratic U.S. Army veteran running for Congress in PA-01 to replace Republican Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick and give Bucks and Montgomery Counties a leader with courage and compassion to make real change. Pitch in to join me! [actblue link; video]”
    7:00 AM · Oct 12, 2021

    • Eureka says:

      “it’s complicated”: here’s some readily comprehensible local-yet-national color for those who wish to help:

      This is the resident district of Ryan Samsel, btw, among other Capitol defendants of note.

      This district also abuts and is ideologically continuous in pertinent part with NE Philly: otherwise known to most as the home of Four Seasons Total Landscaping — chosen for “reasons”…; the birthplace (as elaborately detailed in his DOJ bio) of Jeffrey Clark; home of well-known PBs (Capitol defendants) — Zach Rehl and his boys led counter-Impeachment I protest at Fizpatrick’s office, for ex. This besides all the wealthy conservatives elsewhere in the district-proper.

      There’s also a regional billionaire (Jeff Yass, “PAs richest man” — see Inquirer; ProPublica) who funds a lot of GOP elections (down to the shit-stirring school board ones).

      IOW Ehasz will need more help than that Cook “Even” for the district suggests.

      Add PA-01 to one’s list of specific “do somethings”.

      I’ll be back for Stefanik later…

      • Eureka says:

        Thread, QRT with Fitzpatrick’s July, 2019 letter to Bill Barr *exhorting him to declare “Antifa” (but unironically) a terrorist org over Andy Ngo*:

        Despite such, former FBI/Special AUSA Fitzpatrick is labeled a “centrist”. Here’s what the Susan Collins of marching fascism had to say published today:

        One of the most centrist House Republicans, Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), said that a cloud is hanging over the hearings because the body investigating Jan. 6 is not a bipartisan independent commission, which was the preference of Fitzpatrick and most Democrats.

        But Fitzpatrick was still quick to say that “everybody should be watching” the hearings. “There are some very troubling things that have been revealed there,” he said.

        Fitzpatrick voted against both impeachments (proposing instead a censure of Trump for the Jan. 6 attack); he voted for the J6 independent commission that — as anticipated well-ahead — never made it out of the Senate.

        • Rayne says:

          There’s a bloody cloud hanging over the committee because nearly half of the House is implicated and a bipartisan independent commission was nearly impossible.

          Jesus, Fitzpatrick didn’t object to the electoral college vote but he’s still implicated because he’s churning out disinfo after the fact. Which GOP besides Cheney and Kinzinger *aren’t* implicated?

        • Eureka says:

          Exactly: cloud-seeder cries rain. These craftily-ineffectual “concerned” “centrists” (really symbionts with an enabling press, so not much cleverity involved) will be the death of us all.

          I hope Ehasz gets what she needs and takes this seat.

          I can’t think of any positive answers to your Q, whether you intended it as rhetorical or not so it goes…

        • Rayne says:

          Rhetorical on my part, merely preaching to the choir.

          Fingers crossed for Ehasz, too. If Fetterman is doing gangbusters, he may help downticket races.

        • Eureka says:

          That’s a really good point and I’m glad you said it (reassuring in my moment of hyperfocus on all the bad actor near-neighbors; that’s the problem with pulling receipts). She’s also the true blue (or poor*) collar, also-straight-talking match to Fetterman, so it all works (**round zhuzhy gesture**).

          *in her vid, she speaks of eating her cereal with water as a child

  12. zoomzoom says:

    Considering how many times these heroes will want to move the line to their liking, it’s hard to know where it will be at any one time every day. Crossing the line, when it is to the point that we cannot avoid crossing the line?
    The Supreme Court, carrying on as they are, they are touching the toe my boot now.
    Are there any procedures to lean on the Supremes other than try and pack the bench?
    Times like these make me glad I’m getting old

    • Bobster33 says:

      Sorry to say this, but Authoritarian Social Dominators (the 6 reactionaries on the Supreme Court) will keep pushing until they are thrown out of the majority. Think Tom Delay, Newt Gingrich, Trump. They all acted as if there were no limits–until they were thrown out.

  13. OldTulsaDude says:

    I wonder if the Huerta ruling would have been the same if petitioner had been a blue state.

  14. 90’s Country says:

    I haven’t even read the article but Adam Serwer nailed it with his title: “The Cruelty is the Point”

  15. Nehoa says:

    I am OK with a theocratic state as long as the Dalai Lama is the head and Bhuddists run the show. Just kidding of course to make a point.

    • MB says:

      I know you’re kidding, but…the “Buddhist” regime in Myanmar is a perfect example that any religion can be twisted and used as the springboard for authoritarian government…

      • Nehoa says:

        That was on my mind, but I was thinking more of Tibet. What the Myanmar government did to the Rohingya was disgraceful. Shamed me as a Buddhist.

  16. Ddub says:

    Star Chamber. No, way worse. They pit State against State, citizen against citizen, destroy any regulation Business doesn’t like. Accelerationist’s wet dream this coo coo court is.
    Just in time for catabolic collapse. Now they will have all legal right to race headlong to the bottom.

  17. Jenny says:

    Regarding the EPA decision:

    “Only When The Last Tree Has Died And The Last River Been Poisoned and The Last Fish Been Caught, We Realize We Cannot Eat Money.” Cree Indian Proverb

  18. Naomi Schiff says:

    Maybe the planet will be better off without humans. Too bad we won’t be around to see it.

  19. klynn says:


    I live in one of “those” states.
    If a woman is in duress and in anguish due to fetus not thriving and fetus is suffering and she can feel it, is there any type of lawsuit she can file due to being denied an abortion?

    • Tom says:

      Don’t people have their pets put down when they’re suffering and beyond treatment? Which reminds me that the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in Great Britain was founded in 1824, way before there was any equivalent agency to protect children.

  20. Eureka says:

    Speaking of national holidays in celebration of democracy, Putin has detained Ivan Fedotov, a goalie draftee of the Philadelphia Flyers, for evading army service.

    Hockey News Hub is following this with a detailed thread, interesting for all the machinations: sounds like CSKA Moscow (his team) dimed him out They’re after a friend of his, too (another player). HNH has video of his family trying to see him as he was taken in an ambulance to ? post-initial detention (I take the real fighter to be his mom).

    No one will convince me that Putin did not do this at this time *quite specifically* for the US’s July 4th weekend, given all the hockey x Cold war history — Miracle on Ice and beyond — and much like his accepted invite from the US congresspersons a few years ago.

    And he got a Philadelphia draftee, to boot (that point I’ll accede to coincidence +/- bonus, lacking ATM base sample knowledge of other such international sports draftees available for “involuntary relocation”). Besides the birthplace-of-nation angle, Biden has associations to the state including FLOTUS’ origins in the area (and Philly fandom).

    The Inquirer’s got an article up, too.

    Sounds like a job for Gritty.

  21. mospeck says:

    you know, you watch the old Ukrainian postmen in defensive positions hiding in the woods, in the ditches, waiting for it. They’re unencumbered by fate. Also strange is that music is shockingly still actually getting made by the young ones, even though it’s like 54 years after 1968

Comments are closed.