Robert L. Tsai
@robertltsai.bsky.social
Author of DEMAND THE IMPOSSIBLE (@WWNorton.com), amzn.to/45LFzNg | Next: BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF COAL COUNTRY (NYU Press) | Prof & Harry Elwood Warren Scholar, Boston U | constitutional law & politics, legal history, democracy | https://linktr.ee/roberttsai
Pinned
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
“Don’t Know” and “Nobody” doing better than Schumer or Jeffries
November 8, 2025 at 3:23 AM
“Don’t Know” and “Nobody” doing better than Schumer or Jeffries
“Don’t Know” and “Nobody” doing better than Schumer or Jeffries
November 8, 2025 at 3:23 AM
“Don’t Know” and “Nobody” doing better than Schumer or Jeffries
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
Sad to see a mighty cultural institution reduced to this: “Audiences are staying away. Internal sales figures obtained by The New York Times showed ticket sales down by about 50 percent from same period last year…..Dozens of employees, many with decades of experience, have been fired or quit.”
The Kennedy Center Crackup
www.nytimes.com
November 7, 2025 at 5:50 PM
Sad to see a mighty cultural institution reduced to this: “Audiences are staying away. Internal sales figures obtained by The New York Times showed ticket sales down by about 50 percent from same period last year…..Dozens of employees, many with decades of experience, have been fired or quit.”
Sad to see a mighty cultural institution reduced to this: “Audiences are staying away. Internal sales figures obtained by The New York Times showed ticket sales down by about 50 percent from same period last year…..Dozens of employees, many with decades of experience, have been fired or quit.”
The Kennedy Center Crackup
www.nytimes.com
November 7, 2025 at 5:50 PM
Sad to see a mighty cultural institution reduced to this: “Audiences are staying away. Internal sales figures obtained by The New York Times showed ticket sales down by about 50 percent from same period last year…..Dozens of employees, many with decades of experience, have been fired or quit.”
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
Hero jury saves democracy gone a-rye
Jury nullification is good and it's a good sign for America's path out of authoritarianism that juries are recognizing their power to nullify.
November 6, 2025 at 7:58 PM
Hero jury saves democracy gone a-rye
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
“Do you know that I consider it immoral to teach in the schools that the Constitution of the United states is too sacred to change, almost to touch? Why, what are we, a lot of degenerates?"
- Charles Beard, 1915
- Charles Beard, 1915
November 6, 2025 at 12:24 PM
“Do you know that I consider it immoral to teach in the schools that the Constitution of the United states is too sacred to change, almost to touch? Why, what are we, a lot of degenerates?"
- Charles Beard, 1915
- Charles Beard, 1915
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
Catch-all
Cat-y’al
Catty-all
Katyal
Cat-y’al
Catty-all
Katyal
November 5, 2025 at 5:44 PM
Catch-all
Cat-y’al
Catty-all
Katyal
Cat-y’al
Catty-all
Katyal
Catch-all
Cat-y’al
Catty-all
Katyal
Cat-y’al
Catty-all
Katyal
November 5, 2025 at 5:44 PM
Catch-all
Cat-y’al
Catty-all
Katyal
Cat-y’al
Catty-all
Katyal
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
@mgraber1.bsky.social reviews Justice Barrett’s book:
“By presenting judging as a realm of pure law, insulated from politics, the justices offer a picture so implausible that it makes the opposite claim—that judging is nothing but politics—more credible.”
“By presenting judging as a realm of pure law, insulated from politics, the justices offer a picture so implausible that it makes the opposite claim—that judging is nothing but politics—more credible.”
Justice Barrett’s Campaign Biography
Amy Coney Barrett’s book, "Listening to the Law," claims the Supreme Court is above politics. Its very existence proves otherwise.
washingtonmonthly.com
November 3, 2025 at 11:27 PM
@mgraber1.bsky.social reviews Justice Barrett’s book:
“By presenting judging as a realm of pure law, insulated from politics, the justices offer a picture so implausible that it makes the opposite claim—that judging is nothing but politics—more credible.”
“By presenting judging as a realm of pure law, insulated from politics, the justices offer a picture so implausible that it makes the opposite claim—that judging is nothing but politics—more credible.”
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
This is a great review by @mgraber1.bsky.social. I love the description of Barrett’s book (and others like it) as “campaign biography.”
@mgraber1.bsky.social reviews Justice Barrett’s book:
“By presenting judging as a realm of pure law, insulated from politics, the justices offer a picture so implausible that it makes the opposite claim—that judging is nothing but politics—more credible.”
“By presenting judging as a realm of pure law, insulated from politics, the justices offer a picture so implausible that it makes the opposite claim—that judging is nothing but politics—more credible.”
Justice Barrett’s Campaign Biography
Amy Coney Barrett’s book, "Listening to the Law," claims the Supreme Court is above politics. Its very existence proves otherwise.
washingtonmonthly.com
November 4, 2025 at 12:44 AM
This is a great review by @mgraber1.bsky.social. I love the description of Barrett’s book (and others like it) as “campaign biography.”
@mgraber1.bsky.social reviews Justice Barrett’s book:
“By presenting judging as a realm of pure law, insulated from politics, the justices offer a picture so implausible that it makes the opposite claim—that judging is nothing but politics—more credible.”
“By presenting judging as a realm of pure law, insulated from politics, the justices offer a picture so implausible that it makes the opposite claim—that judging is nothing but politics—more credible.”
Justice Barrett’s Campaign Biography
Amy Coney Barrett’s book, "Listening to the Law," claims the Supreme Court is above politics. Its very existence proves otherwise.
washingtonmonthly.com
November 3, 2025 at 11:27 PM
@mgraber1.bsky.social reviews Justice Barrett’s book:
“By presenting judging as a realm of pure law, insulated from politics, the justices offer a picture so implausible that it makes the opposite claim—that judging is nothing but politics—more credible.”
“By presenting judging as a realm of pure law, insulated from politics, the justices offer a picture so implausible that it makes the opposite claim—that judging is nothing but politics—more credible.”
I’m with Kagan if opportunities to narrow a ruling or influence lower court judges and non-judicial actors seems possible
“Justice Kagan’s approach goes like this: Even on a 6-to-3 court, the Democratic appointees can sometimes strategize their way into narrower rulings, smaller losses or even outright victory…. Justice Jackson, on the other hand, is aiming for an audience beyond the court, speaking to the public”
The Debate Dividing the Supreme Court’s Liberal Justices
www.nytimes.com
November 1, 2025 at 8:40 PM
I’m with Kagan if opportunities to narrow a ruling or influence lower court judges and non-judicial actors seems possible
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
“Justice Kagan’s approach goes like this: Even on a 6-to-3 court, the Democratic appointees can sometimes strategize their way into narrower rulings, smaller losses or even outright victory…. Justice Jackson, on the other hand, is aiming for an audience beyond the court, speaking to the public”
The Debate Dividing the Supreme Court’s Liberal Justices
www.nytimes.com
November 1, 2025 at 12:54 PM
“Justice Kagan’s approach goes like this: Even on a 6-to-3 court, the Democratic appointees can sometimes strategize their way into narrower rulings, smaller losses or even outright victory…. Justice Jackson, on the other hand, is aiming for an audience beyond the court, speaking to the public”
“Justice Kagan’s approach goes like this: Even on a 6-to-3 court, the Democratic appointees can sometimes strategize their way into narrower rulings, smaller losses or even outright victory…. Justice Jackson, on the other hand, is aiming for an audience beyond the court, speaking to the public”
The Debate Dividing the Supreme Court’s Liberal Justices
www.nytimes.com
November 1, 2025 at 12:54 PM
“Justice Kagan’s approach goes like this: Even on a 6-to-3 court, the Democratic appointees can sometimes strategize their way into narrower rulings, smaller losses or even outright victory…. Justice Jackson, on the other hand, is aiming for an audience beyond the court, speaking to the public”
This shouldn’t be a surprise
#BREAKING The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sides against U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis, who had asked Border Patrol chief Greg Bovino to appear in her Chicago courtroom on a daily basis.
The appeals court finds that her order "infringes on the separation of powers."
The appeals court finds that her order "infringes on the separation of powers."
October 31, 2025 at 8:58 PM
This shouldn’t be a surprise
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
In a populist age, the willingness to fight is more valuable to voters than other traits
October 31, 2025 at 12:57 PM
In a populist age, the willingness to fight is more valuable to voters than other traits
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
Good to see some colleagues and listen to Justice Sotomayor for a bit.
October 27, 2025 at 11:03 PM
Good to see some colleagues and listen to Justice Sotomayor for a bit.
In a populist age, the willingness to fight is more valuable to voters than other traits
October 31, 2025 at 12:57 PM
In a populist age, the willingness to fight is more valuable to voters than other traits
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
“This revocation is part of Trump and his hogmen’s reworking of America’s immigration and visa system….This move also seems clearly to be part of a wider, authoritarian attack on things the government considers un-American: people of color, literary culture, and those it considers critics.”
The U.S. has revoked the visa of Nobel winner Wole Soyinka.
The American government has revoked the visa of Wole Soyinka, the Nigerian author who won the 1986 Nobel Prize in literature, according to Al Jazeera. The writer received what he called a “rather c…
lithub.com
October 30, 2025 at 12:58 PM
“This revocation is part of Trump and his hogmen’s reworking of America’s immigration and visa system….This move also seems clearly to be part of a wider, authoritarian attack on things the government considers un-American: people of color, literary culture, and those it considers critics.”
Reposted by Robert L. Tsai
