Susan Ert-ker
@susan-in-fl.bsky.social
Public school advocate. Lover of civil debates. Retired C.P.A.
What’s another phrase for the ability to pick a public school other than your neighborhood school ? Here’s an argument to STOP calling it school choice:
open.substack.com/pub/curmudgu...
open.substack.com/pub/curmudgu...
Stop Calling It School Choice
When framing a debate, it helps to pick just the right names.
open.substack.com
July 24, 2025 at 6:53 PM
What’s another phrase for the ability to pick a public school other than your neighborhood school ? Here’s an argument to STOP calling it school choice:
open.substack.com/pub/curmudgu...
open.substack.com/pub/curmudgu...
Clearly the six subversive extremist justices want the lower courts to discuss “subject to the jurisdiction.” They want lots of voices in the conversation, yes?
Couldn’t they have accomplished that without banning nationwide injunctions? That’s what they did, correct?
Couldn’t they have accomplished that without banning nationwide injunctions? That’s what they did, correct?
July 6, 2025 at 2:16 PM
Clearly the six subversive extremist justices want the lower courts to discuss “subject to the jurisdiction.” They want lots of voices in the conversation, yes?
Couldn’t they have accomplished that without banning nationwide injunctions? That’s what they did, correct?
Couldn’t they have accomplished that without banning nationwide injunctions? That’s what they did, correct?
Perhaps the six subversive extremists didn’t want to stay the injunction because that would have immediately harmed the plaintiffs. Admittedly I don’t understand why everyone affected has to sue which is what their ruling said, yes? If a law is unconstitutional, then it should be struck down.
July 6, 2025 at 2:12 PM
Perhaps the six subversive extremists didn’t want to stay the injunction because that would have immediately harmed the plaintiffs. Admittedly I don’t understand why everyone affected has to sue which is what their ruling said, yes? If a law is unconstitutional, then it should be struck down.
Perhaps the six subversive extremists didn’t want to stay the injunction because that would have immediately harmed the plaintiffs. Also they want the lower courts to discuss “subject to the jurisdiction.”
July 6, 2025 at 2:07 PM
Perhaps the six subversive extremists didn’t want to stay the injunction because that would have immediately harmed the plaintiffs. Also they want the lower courts to discuss “subject to the jurisdiction.”
It’s a weird law. Now the case goes back to be decided on something other than free speech rights?
July 6, 2025 at 1:59 PM
It’s a weird law. Now the case goes back to be decided on something other than free speech rights?
Thomas was wrong about this. The better path is to make every neighborhood public school excellent NOT create vouchers. Excerpt from article:
July 6, 2025 at 1:38 PM
Thomas was wrong about this. The better path is to make every neighborhood public school excellent NOT create vouchers. Excerpt from article:
I’m glad he’s worried about this. Excerpts from the article:
JD Vance flippantly referring to "due process" on social media, and Stephen Miller threatening to suspend habeas corpus if judges didn't "do the right thing." Habeas corpus protects against unlawful imprisonment.
JD Vance flippantly referring to "due process" on social media, and Stephen Miller threatening to suspend habeas corpus if judges didn't "do the right thing." Habeas corpus protects against unlawful imprisonment.
July 6, 2025 at 1:32 PM
I’m glad he’s worried about this. Excerpts from the article:
JD Vance flippantly referring to "due process" on social media, and Stephen Miller threatening to suspend habeas corpus if judges didn't "do the right thing." Habeas corpus protects against unlawful imprisonment.
JD Vance flippantly referring to "due process" on social media, and Stephen Miller threatening to suspend habeas corpus if judges didn't "do the right thing." Habeas corpus protects against unlawful imprisonment.
I agree with this that he said. Excerpt from the article:
"It's almost dystopian. And when I think of people wrapping themselves in the Constitution while they are simultaneously doing violence to it ... it is really scary stuff,"
"It's almost dystopian. And when I think of people wrapping themselves in the Constitution while they are simultaneously doing violence to it ... it is really scary stuff,"
July 6, 2025 at 1:28 PM
I agree with this that he said. Excerpt from the article:
"It's almost dystopian. And when I think of people wrapping themselves in the Constitution while they are simultaneously doing violence to it ... it is really scary stuff,"
"It's almost dystopian. And when I think of people wrapping themselves in the Constitution while they are simultaneously doing violence to it ... it is really scary stuff,"
Frankenstein was the doctor. The monster he created had no name.
July 6, 2025 at 1:23 PM
Frankenstein was the doctor. The monster he created had no name.
Reposted by Susan Ert-ker
What Trump is doing to the Education Department, USAID, and the CFPB today can be done to DHS, ICE, CBP, and any other agency tomorrow. This is the blueprint. Defund, RIF, or shutter every agency the president dislikes. Executive authority now means unilateral power to restructure the government.
July 3, 2025 at 12:43 PM
What Trump is doing to the Education Department, USAID, and the CFPB today can be done to DHS, ICE, CBP, and any other agency tomorrow. This is the blueprint. Defund, RIF, or shutter every agency the president dislikes. Executive authority now means unilateral power to restructure the government.