David Lewis
@davidlewis61.bsky.social
Graduated from 40 years as an appellate lawyer to being a gardener. Influenced by Voltaire: "Il faut cultiver notre jardin."
I hope I have not oversimplified Justice Stephens's statement which I'm attaching here. It's not from a footnote, but rather a dissenting opinion in Smith v. Robbins, 528 U.S. 259, 290:
December 4, 2025 at 2:28 AM
I hope I have not oversimplified Justice Stephens's statement which I'm attaching here. It's not from a footnote, but rather a dissenting opinion in Smith v. Robbins, 528 U.S. 259, 290:
And why should we take advice from a guy who's got the best insurance money can buy (but that we pay for) and who is basically getting paid by the insurers and other health care providers whom he's protecting here.
November 24, 2025 at 4:59 PM
And why should we take advice from a guy who's got the best insurance money can buy (but that we pay for) and who is basically getting paid by the insurers and other health care providers whom he's protecting here.
Here's my cumberlandense
November 23, 2025 at 3:13 AM
Here's my cumberlandense
Didn't know Trump was eligible.
October 28, 2025 at 5:03 AM
Didn't know Trump was eligible.
Not sure about the chronology here, but this guy became anti-fa at an early age.
October 19, 2025 at 6:20 PM
Not sure about the chronology here, but this guy became anti-fa at an early age.
My fave —- probably not terrorists:
October 18, 2025 at 9:28 PM
My fave —- probably not terrorists:
If Donald Trump really wants that, this is what he'll get:
October 14, 2025 at 4:43 PM
If Donald Trump really wants that, this is what he'll get:
I think that the identities of the lawyers who perpetrated this folly should be memorialized, for historical reasons:
September 19, 2025 at 7:00 PM
I think that the identities of the lawyers who perpetrated this folly should be memorialized, for historical reasons:
Also you have to be convicted of three racketeering acts and he only alleges one. And if there are any doubters out there about this not being a racketeering act, here's the list. Shouting at the president is not in it.
September 17, 2025 at 3:21 AM
Also you have to be convicted of three racketeering acts and he only alleges one. And if there are any doubters out there about this not being a racketeering act, here's the list. Shouting at the president is not in it.
I was just a public defender, but I know that to be indicted for or convicted of RICO you have to be guilty of 3 "racketeering acts," and these folks only committed one act and it (shouting at the president) is not a racketeering act listed in 18 USC 1861, listed below. This man is lying to us.
September 17, 2025 at 3:17 AM
I was just a public defender, but I know that to be indicted for or convicted of RICO you have to be guilty of 3 "racketeering acts," and these folks only committed one act and it (shouting at the president) is not a racketeering act listed in 18 USC 1861, listed below. This man is lying to us.
What an imbecile, or more likely, a liar. These people will not be indicted for RICO.
To be convicted of RICO, you have to have committed 3 of the following racketeering acts. Shouting at the President is only one act, and it is not even a listed one:
To be convicted of RICO, you have to have committed 3 of the following racketeering acts. Shouting at the President is only one act, and it is not even a listed one:
September 17, 2025 at 3:09 AM
What an imbecile, or more likely, a liar. These people will not be indicted for RICO.
To be convicted of RICO, you have to have committed 3 of the following racketeering acts. Shouting at the President is only one act, and it is not even a listed one:
To be convicted of RICO, you have to have committed 3 of the following racketeering acts. Shouting at the President is only one act, and it is not even a listed one:
What a shame that our MAGA Republican Party can no longer even live up to the simple principles that guided its founding.
From the first substantive paragraph of the Republican platform of 1856:
From the first substantive paragraph of the Republican platform of 1856:
September 16, 2025 at 12:54 PM
What a shame that our MAGA Republican Party can no longer even live up to the simple principles that guided its founding.
From the first substantive paragraph of the Republican platform of 1856:
From the first substantive paragraph of the Republican platform of 1856:
And then, there’s this:
August 4, 2025 at 3:40 AM
And then, there’s this:
Robert Frost nailed this in the "Mending Wall." MAGA are our own "old stone savages," unwilling to examine their preconceptions.
August 2, 2025 at 3:40 PM
Robert Frost nailed this in the "Mending Wall." MAGA are our own "old stone savages," unwilling to examine their preconceptions.
On Texas. If they slim down all the GOP margins, necessary to get more GOP districts, then in a wave election, everybody's at risk.
boltsmag.org/a-new-cycle-...
boltsmag.org/a-new-cycle-...
July 31, 2025 at 7:48 PM
On Texas. If they slim down all the GOP margins, necessary to get more GOP districts, then in a wave election, everybody's at risk.
boltsmag.org/a-new-cycle-...
boltsmag.org/a-new-cycle-...
Probably a lot more. From NYC Comptrollers 2023 report on City damage settlement.
July 19, 2025 at 2:00 AM
Probably a lot more. From NYC Comptrollers 2023 report on City damage settlement.
I see where he gets it. Treasury issues a monthly report showing Receipts, Outlays and Deficit or Surplus (shown as a-). Somebody must have told him about it, and the US ran a surplus of 27 billion in June. On the other hand, since Trump took office there's been a total 498 billion deficit.
July 14, 2025 at 2:24 AM
I see where he gets it. Treasury issues a monthly report showing Receipts, Outlays and Deficit or Surplus (shown as a-). Somebody must have told him about it, and the US ran a surplus of 27 billion in June. On the other hand, since Trump took office there's been a total 498 billion deficit.
It's been unconstitutional since Tumey v. Ohio (192?).
The corrupt conservatives will try to distinguish Tumey, on the grounds Tumey was a criminal case, but that's a distinction without a difference, as the lawyers say.
14th Amendment --
The corrupt conservatives will try to distinguish Tumey, on the grounds Tumey was a criminal case, but that's a distinction without a difference, as the lawyers say.
14th Amendment --
June 22, 2025 at 7:08 PM
It's been unconstitutional since Tumey v. Ohio (192?).
The corrupt conservatives will try to distinguish Tumey, on the grounds Tumey was a criminal case, but that's a distinction without a difference, as the lawyers say.
14th Amendment --
The corrupt conservatives will try to distinguish Tumey, on the grounds Tumey was a criminal case, but that's a distinction without a difference, as the lawyers say.
14th Amendment --
Pardon? Bushy eyebrows have always been masculine. John L Lewis, a coal mine orgainizer, was the champ in this department. Nobody tougher. And Wikipedia specifically notes his "forest-like eyebrows."
March 17, 2025 at 11:05 PM
Pardon? Bushy eyebrows have always been masculine. John L Lewis, a coal mine orgainizer, was the champ in this department. Nobody tougher. And Wikipedia specifically notes his "forest-like eyebrows."
Wait. I may be wrong, but I thought this would result in it having to go back to the circuit. (Maybe Trump can try to jump that step, but a verrrry long shot in SCOTUS, which didn't grab the case already.) From PBS:
March 5, 2025 at 4:27 AM
Wait. I may be wrong, but I thought this would result in it having to go back to the circuit. (Maybe Trump can try to jump that step, but a verrrry long shot in SCOTUS, which didn't grab the case already.) From PBS:
Nice to know your local Mafia can still organize a good drive-by, even if they can barely shoot straight.
March 1, 2025 at 5:55 PM
Nice to know your local Mafia can still organize a good drive-by, even if they can barely shoot straight.