The Questionable Authority
banner
questauthority.bsky.social
The Questionable Authority
@questauthority.bsky.social
Father, Army Husband (Ret.), lawyer. KUSK alum; public servant. Litigation disaster tour guide. Odd Fellow (and odd fellow). Proud member of the terminally online community since 1993. he/him
Shiv.
November 11, 2025 at 7:27 AM
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
November 11, 2025 at 7:22 AM
Reposted by The Questionable Authority
Apropos of nada ... Toyota has just teased an EV version of the true king of light military vehicles ... the Hilux!

www.caranddriver.com/news/a693065...
www.caranddriver.com
November 11, 2025 at 2:38 AM
McConnell was always much much more about blocking than passing - consistent with his overall philosophy of governance.
November 11, 2025 at 6:33 AM
There are a couple of law types on the paper, apparently, and the abstract isn't totally nuts.
November 11, 2025 at 6:30 AM
McConnell was a very effective opposition leader during the Obama years - both majority and minority. And reasonably effective as majority leader under Trump.

Don't believe me? Go ask Justices Gorsuch and Barrett.
November 11, 2025 at 5:42 AM
Reposted by The Questionable Authority
Their answer was, "I can't answer that"
November 11, 2025 at 4:32 AM
Also the idea that leadership has no real power over caucus members, especially when in the minority, is so bizarre as to border on batshit.

One need only look at (eg) McConnell's extremely effective stint as minority leader to see that.
November 11, 2025 at 4:33 AM
I don't know if Chucklefuck made the deal. But if he wasn't informed every step of the way and didn't ultimately sign off, it would be remarkable.
November 11, 2025 at 4:30 AM
literal LOL
November 11, 2025 at 1:54 AM
Must have been a fun standup today.
November 11, 2025 at 1:54 AM
Awesome, man - living the academic dream. Really happy for all y'all.
November 11, 2025 at 1:52 AM
Same, which is why I deleted.
November 10, 2025 at 11:12 PM
Hey! Two body problem solved?
November 10, 2025 at 10:54 PM
Painfully not.
November 10, 2025 at 9:41 PM
It chips away at protections but does not reverse them entirely.
November 10, 2025 at 8:23 PM
If it does - and that would be years away - it is by far more likely that the court would uphold the right to be religiously bigoted in your use of secular authority, and not address Obergefell at all.
November 10, 2025 at 8:01 PM
Reposted by The Questionable Authority
Few things have made more more mad over recent months than the attention given to this while the Supreme Court is actually taking step after step to make life more difficult for trans and nonbinary people.

Like, this actually happened last week — in an unsigned order.
SCOTUS lets Trump administration implement anti-trans, anti-nonbinary passport policy
The Democratic appointees, led by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented. The ruling, which applies during litigation, effectively reverses two lower court rulings.
www.lawdork.com
November 10, 2025 at 7:27 PM
Yes. And I think that's built into duty - or hope it is, at least.
November 10, 2025 at 7:55 PM