Chad
@thochad.bsky.social
Globalist attorney and legal technologist in Minnesota. Ex Wisconsinite.
Aren’t the they ones so always ran to single judge divisions in Texas seeking nationwide relief whenever Biden did something they didn’t like? The cognitive dissonance is deafening.
Alina Habba: "There's a separation of powers for a reason. The executive branch is the ultimate authority on federal issues."
February 11, 2025 at 8:55 PM
Aren’t the they ones so always ran to single judge divisions in Texas seeking nationwide relief whenever Biden did something they didn’t like? The cognitive dissonance is deafening.
Reposted by Chad
As the forces of hatred are on the march, my promise is this:
Our trans neighbors will continue to be safe, protected, and welcome in Minnesota.
Our trans neighbors will continue to be safe, protected, and welcome in Minnesota.
February 7, 2025 at 10:02 PM
As the forces of hatred are on the march, my promise is this:
Our trans neighbors will continue to be safe, protected, and welcome in Minnesota.
Our trans neighbors will continue to be safe, protected, and welcome in Minnesota.
Reposted by Chad
Ouch. Might need some aloe for that burn.
February 4, 2025 at 8:20 PM
Ouch. Might need some aloe for that burn.
TIL: tater tot hot dish is just lazy shepherd’s pie. Though not as lazy as frozen shepherd’s pie (from Canada!).
February 3, 2025 at 10:51 PM
TIL: tater tot hot dish is just lazy shepherd’s pie. Though not as lazy as frozen shepherd’s pie (from Canada!).
Reposted by Chad
February 3, 2025 at 8:24 PM
I was thinking, would they really want a Democratic president to be able to do all this crazy stuff?
Then I realized their goal is to never have another Democratic (or democratic) president.
Then I realized their goal is to never have another Democratic (or democratic) president.
Draw your own conclusions, but Donald Trump is not behaving like a leader who expects democratic accountability for himself or his party next year or in 2028.
February 3, 2025 at 5:27 AM
I was thinking, would they really want a Democratic president to be able to do all this crazy stuff?
Then I realized their goal is to never have another Democratic (or democratic) president.
Then I realized their goal is to never have another Democratic (or democratic) president.
Reposted by Chad
For the visual learners...
February 3, 2025 at 12:25 AM
For the visual learners...
The tariffs, the birthright citizenship, probably other EOs, could well be considered major questions.
With birthright citizenship, it could even let SCOTUS decline to address the constitutional issue. That said, the major questions doctrine may well only apply to Democrats.
With birthright citizenship, it could even let SCOTUS decline to address the constitutional issue. That said, the major questions doctrine may well only apply to Democrats.
This Lawfare article makes a compelling argument that Trump's tariffs are ultra vires -- at least if the Supreme Court also applies the Major Questions Doctrine to executive actions by Republican presidents.
If only we had the NSL Podcast to take us through the intricacies of IEEPA one more time...
If only we had the NSL Podcast to take us through the intricacies of IEEPA one more time...
The Case Against IEEPA Tariffs
Forcing Trump to use trade statutes—or to go to Congress to seek new authorities—would be more consistent with IEEPA’s history and practice.
www.lawfaremedia.org
February 2, 2025 at 4:45 AM
The tariffs, the birthright citizenship, probably other EOs, could well be considered major questions.
With birthright citizenship, it could even let SCOTUS decline to address the constitutional issue. That said, the major questions doctrine may well only apply to Democrats.
With birthright citizenship, it could even let SCOTUS decline to address the constitutional issue. That said, the major questions doctrine may well only apply to Democrats.
This is the entirety of the currently posted Fox News article. Two of the three paragraphs are blatantly wrong. IEEPA was signed almost half a century ago and there is no legislation for these tariffs, merely a concocted emergency like the Reichstag fire. www.foxnews.com/politics/tru...
February 1, 2025 at 10:53 PM
This is the entirety of the currently posted Fox News article. Two of the three paragraphs are blatantly wrong. IEEPA was signed almost half a century ago and there is no legislation for these tariffs, merely a concocted emergency like the Reichstag fire. www.foxnews.com/politics/tru...
Isn’t that contradictory? It has to be “honest” but specifies things that may not be true, and are at best seen through rose colored glasses.
And whichever heritage foundation lackey is writing the dictator’s EOs doesn’t understand that “America” isn’t a country.
And whichever heritage foundation lackey is writing the dictator’s EOs doesn’t understand that “America” isn’t a country.
January 30, 2025 at 12:44 AM
Isn’t that contradictory? It has to be “honest” but specifies things that may not be true, and are at best seen through rose colored glasses.
And whichever heritage foundation lackey is writing the dictator’s EOs doesn’t understand that “America” isn’t a country.
And whichever heritage foundation lackey is writing the dictator’s EOs doesn’t understand that “America” isn’t a country.
Of course they blame Biden.
I’m not blaming Trump either—it’s the bird flu issue. But they campaigned on “tHe PrIcE oF eGgS.”
I’m not blaming Trump either—it’s the bird flu issue. But they campaigned on “tHe PrIcE oF eGgS.”
January 29, 2025 at 4:35 AM
Of course they blame Biden.
I’m not blaming Trump either—it’s the bird flu issue. But they campaigned on “tHe PrIcE oF eGgS.”
I’m not blaming Trump either—it’s the bird flu issue. But they campaigned on “tHe PrIcE oF eGgS.”
Reposted by Chad
I think my comment on Fox News triggered MAGA.
This is actually very few things I agree with the Alliance Defensing F[ascis]m on. Purely on free speech grounds.
This is actually very few things I agree with the Alliance Defensing F[ascis]m on. Purely on free speech grounds.
January 29, 2025 at 1:02 AM
I think my comment on Fox News triggered MAGA.
This is actually very few things I agree with the Alliance Defensing F[ascis]m on. Purely on free speech grounds.
This is actually very few things I agree with the Alliance Defensing F[ascis]m on. Purely on free speech grounds.
Reposted by Chad
Dear Internet:
#SCOTUS holding that the President can't be prosecuted for official acts does *not* mean, under *any* non-frivolous reading, that the *federal government,* including all of its officers, is immune from civil suits for *its* official acts.
There's just no equivalency between the two.
#SCOTUS holding that the President can't be prosecuted for official acts does *not* mean, under *any* non-frivolous reading, that the *federal government,* including all of its officers, is immune from civil suits for *its* official acts.
There's just no equivalency between the two.
January 28, 2025 at 2:30 PM
Dear Internet:
#SCOTUS holding that the President can't be prosecuted for official acts does *not* mean, under *any* non-frivolous reading, that the *federal government,* including all of its officers, is immune from civil suits for *its* official acts.
There's just no equivalency between the two.
#SCOTUS holding that the President can't be prosecuted for official acts does *not* mean, under *any* non-frivolous reading, that the *federal government,* including all of its officers, is immune from civil suits for *its* official acts.
There's just no equivalency between the two.
Reposted by Chad
Resistance takes many forms.
January 28, 2025 at 5:00 PM
Resistance takes many forms.
Reposted by Chad
Here's a longer post explaining all of this in a bit more detail:
www.stevevladeck.com/p/120-the-im...
www.stevevladeck.com/p/120-the-im...
120. The Impoundment Crisis of 2025
The Trump administration's Monday spending freeze is likely to provoke a crisis over the constitutionality of "impoundment"—one that the justices could well have to resolve *very* soon.
www.stevevladeck.com
January 28, 2025 at 4:52 AM
Here's a longer post explaining all of this in a bit more detail:
www.stevevladeck.com/p/120-the-im...
www.stevevladeck.com/p/120-the-im...
Reposted by Chad
To play this out, there will be literally dozens of lawsuits challenging what OMB is doing on the ground that it violates the Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Trump’s DOJ will argue that the Act is unconstitutional. And this will quickly get to #SCOTUS, where it will be the biggest case of the term.
January 28, 2025 at 2:53 AM
To play this out, there will be literally dozens of lawsuits challenging what OMB is doing on the ground that it violates the Impoundment Control Act of 1974. Trump’s DOJ will argue that the Act is unconstitutional. And this will quickly get to #SCOTUS, where it will be the biggest case of the term.
Funny how as soon as Minnesota requires all fees to be shown in pricing online, the travel sites are doing it for hotels. It’s almost as if they can just switch that on….
January 28, 2025 at 4:20 AM
Funny how as soon as Minnesota requires all fees to be shown in pricing online, the travel sites are doing it for hotels. It’s almost as if they can just switch that on….
This Fox News piece cites Hans von Spakovsky, the Heritage Foundation’s resident election fraud propagandist, as “an authority on civil rights and immigration” 🤣😂. That’s like saying Kim Jong Un is an authority on human rights. www.foxnews.com/politics/tru... 1/3
January 27, 2025 at 5:48 PM
This Fox News piece cites Hans von Spakovsky, the Heritage Foundation’s resident election fraud propagandist, as “an authority on civil rights and immigration” 🤣😂. That’s like saying Kim Jong Un is an authority on human rights. www.foxnews.com/politics/tru... 1/3
I’m not defending the Israelis by any means, but isn’t it a bit odd that 4 Israelis are worth 200 Palestinians?
January 25, 2025 at 10:47 PM
I’m not defending the Israelis by any means, but isn’t it a bit odd that 4 Israelis are worth 200 Palestinians?
The Congressional Globe, where the debate on the 14th Amendment is recorded, was recently added to Westlaw.
Justin Amash: The problem with Trump’s birthright citizenship order
Former Rep. Justin Amash explains why President Donald Trump's interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment is wrong.
reason.com
January 24, 2025 at 10:15 PM
The Congressional Globe, where the debate on the 14th Amendment is recorded, was recently added to Westlaw.
Reposted by Chad
Reposted by Chad
This is perfect explanation
January 23, 2025 at 6:22 AM
This is perfect explanation
Reposted by Chad
Americans for Prosperity threatens WI voters with a good time if they don’t vote for Schimel. They were even kind enough to provide a postage paid envelope for my reply.
January 22, 2025 at 4:20 PM
Americans for Prosperity threatens WI voters with a good time if they don’t vote for Schimel. They were even kind enough to provide a postage paid envelope for my reply.
Reposted by Chad
“‘Love thy neighbor’ is woke” - MAGA
January 22, 2025 at 12:48 AM
“‘Love thy neighbor’ is woke” - MAGA