it makes no coherent sense other than that it is designed to hamstring democratic presidents and unleash republican ones

/8 At any rate, congratulations to the Federalist Society for an achievement beyond the reach of the British, outside the grasp of bloody civil war, impossible to Nazis and Soviets and terrorists: defeating the American idea.

Americanists and lawyers ask, what does the Constitution say? Comparativists ask, who controls the High Court, the militia, and the clerics?

I don’t think it’s an exaggeration at all to say the decision threatens the Republic. I might not have said so in 2015, before I saw how triumphantly lawless and autocratic the President could be, and how so many people would applaud it or at least shrug.

Can we maybe get this bullshit updated?

the modern American right has always been the sludge that Nixon left behind, so it makes sense that their courts would eventually exonerate him in some form or another

Of course it's being coordinated. That's what the Federalist Society *is*. It's a conspiracy against Americans' freedom, self governance and the rule of law and it's winning bsky.app/profile/debt...

Again, Black people are an exception here, as basically anyone who stayed in the Jim Crow South has a living memory of living under what amounted to fascism, including the “always walking on eggshells/lack of social trust/long periods of boring endurance/randomized terrifying violence”

In 2016, Hillary Clinton gave a speech in Wisconsin about the importance of the Supreme Court.

She warned that 2016 was "make or break" for the court—and the country.

National media—focused on her emails and Trump's antics—barely covered the speech.
www.thenation.com/article/arch...

"The Court’s conservative majority has revealed itself to be the most direct threat to American democracy, and any Democrat who is not ready to shelve old fears about “court packing” and get serious about expanding and reforming the Court isn’t made for this moment, period."

Easy to lose sight of the significance here, but the sitting president just gave a speech condemning the Supreme Court for a ruling that expands presidential power. It’s also a president who stands to benefit from this ruling, given that his opponent is vowing to imprison him and his family.

Trump: I would like to see televised military tribunals in which my enemies like Liz Cheney are tried for treason and then put to death.
New York Times Politics page 18 hours later: Democrats are in disarray!!!

New dissertation excerpt just dropped

T̶h̶e̶ a̶r̶i̶s̶t̶o̶c̶r̶a̶t̶s̶!̶ Originalism!

He accuses the dissent of "extreme hypotheticals," then, instead of recognizing Trump as uniquely corrupt and criminal, speculates that the charges against him portend a future in which presidents "cannibalize" one another with criminal charges -- despite two centuries of that not happening.

The Court has purported to strip us of all legal recourse for crimes committed by the most powerful person in the nation. Each and every one of us is now, effectively, at the mercy of an autocrat, who could order our death if he simply made the pretense of connecting it to his official duties.

It really demonstrates incredible contempt for the Founders, who made it clear in numerous writings the constitutional privileges of the presidency expired with the presidency.

Just replace con law textbooks with “whatever our most cartoonish billionaire fascist wants”

that the whole project is at serious and maybe fatal risk if trump is imprisoned or loses in the fall and that conservatives on the court have a duty to try to prevent that any way they can, through the most motivated reasoning they can conjure.