James Lynch
LightNews LightNews
banner
jamuslynch.bsky.social
James Lynch
@jamuslynch.bsky.social
92 followers 320 following 300 posts
It's a bubble pipe.
Posts Replies Media Videos
jamuslynch.bsky.social
Proto labubu?
Vintage 1950s monkey doll
November 27, 2025 at 9:33 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
Gotta keep the riff-raff off The Farm
BAY AREA Stanford preserves legacy admissions by pulling out of Cal Grant aid program By Nanette Asimov, Staff Writer Aug 12, 2025
August 13, 2025 at 2:54 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
I think of this from 2004 often
en.m.wikipedia.org judgments on facts." In a 2004 article appearing in the New York Times Magazine, Suskind wrote: The aide said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' [...] 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. 'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality-judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors...and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do'. [2J International relations scholar Fred Halliday writes that the phrase reality-based community (in contrast to faith-based
August 12, 2025 at 2:08 AM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
Sorry, they did what now?

www.latimes.com/politics/sto...
July 10, 2025 at 4:56 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
Shocked that Barrett can’t distinguish a statute from an executive order here.
The question before us is whether the Government is likely to suffer irreparable harm from the District Courts' entry of injunctions that likely exceed the authority conferred by the Judiciary Act. The answer to that question is yes. See Coleman v. Paccar Inc., 424 U. S. 1301, 1307-1308 (1976) (Rehnquist, C. J., in chambers); Trump v. International Refugee Assistance Project, 582 U. S. 571, 578-579 (2017) (per curiam); see also Maryland v. King, 567 JJ. S. 1301, 1303 (2012) (ROBERTS, C.J., in chambers) ("[AIny time a State is enjoined by a court from effectuating statutes enacted by representatives of its people, it suffers a form of irreparable injury" (alteration in original)). And
June 27, 2025 at 4:30 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
It is not a burden to the federal government to prevent it from violating the plain language of the Constitution
The individual and associational respondents are therefore wrong to characterize the universal injunction as simply an application of the complete-relief principle. Under this principle, the question is not whether an injunction offers complete relief to everyone potentially affected by an allegedly unlawful act; it is whether an injunction will offer complete relief to the plaintiffs before the court. See Cali-fano v. Yamasaki, 442 U. S. 682, 702 (1979) (Unjunctive relief should be no more burdensome to the defendant than necessary to provide complete relief to the plaintiffs' (em-phasis added)). Here, prohibiting enforcement of the Executive Order against the child of an individual pregnant plaintiff will give that plaintiff complete relief: Her child will not be denied citizenship. Extending the injunction to cover all other similarly situated individuals would not render her relief any more complete.
June 27, 2025 at 3:37 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
Barrett fails to consider that there might not be a historical pedigree because Trump has no historical “pedigree.”
Cite as: 606 U. S. _ (2025) 11 Opinion of the Court traditional equitable relief.", Ibid. A modern device need not have an exact historical match, but under Grupo Mexi-cano, it must have a founding-era antecedent. And neither the universal injunction nor a sufficiently comparable predecessor was available from a court of eq ty at the time of our country's inception. See id., at 333. Because the universal injunction lacks a historical pedigree. it falls outside the bounds of a federal court's equitable c thority under the Judiciary Act.10 See id., at 318-319.
June 27, 2025 at 3:07 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
The entirety of part II of Barrett's opinion is an exercise in "Look at this problem that Conservatives created that we now must rectify in the worst possible way!"
II The question whether Congress has granted federal courts the authority to universally enjoin the enforcement of an executive or legislative policy plainly warrants our review, as Members of this Court have repeatedly emphasized. See, e.g., McHenry v. Texas Top Cop Shop, 604 U. S. ___, ___ (2025) (GORSUCH, J., concurring in grant of stay) (slip op., at 1) (“I would . . . take this case now to resolve definitively the question whether a district court may issue universal injunctive relief ”); Labrador v. Poe, 601 U. S. ___, ___–___ (2024) (GORSUCH, J., joined by THOMAS and ALITO, JJ., concurring in grant of stay) (slip op., at 7–8) (“[T]he propriety of universal injunctive relief [is] a question of great significance that has been in need of the Court’s attention for some time”); Griffin v. HM Florida-ORL, LLC, 601 U. S. ___, ___ (2023) (statement of KAVANAUGH, J., joined by BARRETT, J., except as to footnote 1, respecting denial of application for stay) (slip op., at 3) (Universal injunctions present “an important question that could warrant our review in the future”); Trump v. Hawaii, 585 U. S. 667, 713 (2018) (THOMAS, J., concurring) (“If [universal injunctions’] popularity continues, this Court must address their legality”). On multiple occasions, and across administrations, the Solicitor General has asked us to consider the propriety of this expansive remedy. See, e.g., Application for Stay of Injunction in McHenry v. Texas Top Cop Shop, Inc., O. T. 2024, No. 24A653 (Biden administration); Brief for Petitioners in Trump v. Hawaii, O. T. 2017, No. 17–965 (first Trump administration). It is easy to see why. By the end of the Biden administration, we had reached “a state of affairs where almost every major presidential act [was] immediately frozen by a federal district court.” W. Baude & S. Bray, Comment, Proper Parties, Proper Relief, 137 Harv. L. Rev. 153, 174 (2023). The trend has continued: During the first 100 days of the second Trump administration, district courts issued approximately 25 universal injunctions. Congressional Research Service, J. Lampe, Nationwide Injunctions in the First Hundred Days of the Second Trump Administration 1 (May 16, 2025). As the number of universal injunctions has increased, so too has the importance of the issue.
June 27, 2025 at 2:33 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
I understand why Barrett is doing this, but it's still pretty jarring in this instance to be referring to the judicial functioning of an actual monarchy.
screenshot of SCOTUS opinion: "6 TRUMP v. CASA, INC. Opinion of the Court that the High Court of Chancery in England possesses").3 We must therefore ask whether universal injunctions are sufficiently "analogous" to the relief issued "by the High Court of Chancery in England at the time of the adoption of the Constitution and the enactment of the original Judici- ary Act'" Grupo Mexicano, 527 U. S., at 318-319 (quoting A. Dobie, Handbook of Federal Jurisdiction and Procedure 660 (1928)). The answer is no: Neither the universal injunction nor any analogous form of relief was available in the High Court of Chancery in England at the time of the founding. Equity offered a mechanism for the Crown "to secure justice where it would not be secured by the ordinary and existing processes of law." G. Adams, The Origin of English Equity, 16 Colum. L. Rev. 87, 91 (1916). This "judicial prerogative of the King" thus extended to "those causes which the ordi- nary judges were incapable of determining." 1 J. Pomeroy, Equity Jurisprudence §31, p. 27 (1881). Eventually, the Crown instituted the "practice of delegating the cases" that came before" the judicial prerogative "to the chancellor for his sole decision." Id., $34, at 28. This "became the common mode of dealing with such controversies." * Ibid."
June 27, 2025 at 2:23 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
Extreme Bob Ueker voice: “Juuuuuuuust a bit outside”
June 23, 2025 at 7:40 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
I love local government informational technology.
Screenshot of a document that reads "Image Not Available," with a watermark that reads "Unofficial Copy"
June 3, 2025 at 2:01 AM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
Wait... So, you're telling me that conservative SCOTUS justices *can* recuse themselves when there's an appearance of a conflict of interest?
May 22, 2025 at 5:23 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
Mr. President, what will be the result of Medicaid cuts in your "big beautiful bill"?
May 22, 2025 at 1:32 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
I'm always a little creeped out when I see that articles are "updated" years after they were published.
Screenshot from NYT: "Published July 9, 2022 Updated May 9, 2025"
May 15, 2025 at 5:29 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
New graffiti at the edge of the neighborhood.
Graffiti of a cybertruck on fire with the word “traitor” and a crossed out image of Elon musk and the word DOGE, also on fire
May 14, 2025 at 2:20 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
The emoluments clause isn’t limited to emoluments, but also prohibits the president from accepting “any present” for a “a King, Prince, or foreign State.”
Article I, Section 9, Clause 8: No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
May 12, 2025 at 5:50 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
Can robots blaspheme? This feels like blasphemy
1:52 Post ... SimpleApply © @SimpleApply_Al Ad Robert Prevost became the new Pope by using SimpleApply.ai Sign up now and you can land your dream job too! SimpleApply AUTO APPLY TO JOBS ALT 1:40 PM • 5/8/25 • 24K Views 个 Post your reply
May 8, 2025 at 6:01 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
Why is my internet down?

Oh I see.
Xfinity truck in the street
April 28, 2025 at 3:00 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
Finishing a doc and hitting spell/grammar check for the first time, and well...
Screenshot of MS Word Editor showing Editor Score 100%
April 25, 2025 at 7:25 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
Resumes must contain at least 5 P's, 3 F's, and 12 C's.
Screenshot of Google search suggestions: "What are the 5 P's of a resume? What are the 3 C's of a resume? How far back should a resume go? What type of resume do employers now prefer? What are the 4 C's of a resume? What are the 5 C's of interviewing? What to put at the bottom of a resume? What are the 3 F's of resume writing?"
April 23, 2025 at 7:23 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
If this is such a time saving idea, why are there separate arrival and departure spaces?
Sign in an airport: “1 •TIME SAVING IDEA AVOID TRAFFIC CONGESTION Call Your Ride and Ask Them to Meet You Upstairs on the Departures Level For Pick up”
April 10, 2025 at 2:29 AM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
How my child falls asleep
Image of Fauno/Pale Man from the film Pan’s Labryinth, portrayed by Doug Jones. Image shows eyeballs on the palms of the characters hands resting over its face.
April 9, 2025 at 3:37 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
It’s easy to forget that the “best and brightest” was initially used ironically as a dig at JFK’s administration. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bes...
White House spokcsman Kush Desai said Trump had assembled "the best and brightest economic team in modern history" to develop the tariff plan.
April 4, 2025 at 11:41 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
Ah yes, the Protection Racket model of international trade.
But unlike a business deal where both parties negotiate and there is some back and forth, the White House was simply demanding lists of concessions, according to one foreign diplomat deeply involved in the conversations, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to frankly discuss how the White House operated in the sensitive talks. The diplomat said Trump officials wanted regulations and other barriers to be wiped away to boost U.S. goods and services being sold abroad.
April 4, 2025 at 11:35 PM
jamuslynch.bsky.social
“No, I’m the biggest lickspittle!”
Navarro, consistent with his longtime position on tariffs, was the loudest champion of taking aggressive measures. Miller and Vance in particular, said a person with knowledge of the discussions, continually expressed deference to Trump's preferences - reiterating that they were in favor of whatever the president wanted to do. Bessent, a hedge fund manager who some on Wall Street had hoped would serve as a potential ally in restraining the president's tariffs, had made clear even before he was nominated that he would support Trump's trade agenda, The Washington Post and other outlets have previously reported.
April 4, 2025 at 8:51 PM