Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

@sebeller.bsky.social

6.5K followers 2.1K following 4K posts

#Writer #Author work @ home #girldad Daddying #FilmFestival Dir of Comms & Daddying blog Editor - Keeping up w/ 2 daughters & politics 8647 #RedSox #EndGunViolence #Resist Don't ask me for $ - I block ALL cryp*o & other scam solicitations

Posts Media Videos Starter Packs

Pinned

SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊 @sebeller.bsky.social · Nov 11

My 1st post here is for my daughters (and yours), whose voices and spirits may be strong but their rights to speak up, speak freely, and assert autonomy over their own bodies are at great risk. I am forever their ally, their advocate, and their Dad.

DADDYING blog: Our Daddying Thoughts Post-Election

Daddying Editor Scott Beller and Daddying Film Festival & Forum Founder Allan Shedlin, offer their daddying thoughts after digesting results of the 2024 Presidential Election.

bit.ly

10 20 120

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

Jeff Roush @jeffroushwriting.bsky.social · 1h

In the face of the danger, the right
Is opposing your care with its fight.
The repubs’ seeming goal?
Population control,
With a side of political spite.

www.cnn.com/2025/10/09/p...

Obamacare premiums could more than double. Here’s why it matters in the shutdown battle | CNN Politics

At the center of the government shutdown conflict are the enhanced Affordable Care Act subsides that help Americans pay their monthly premiums.

www.cnn.com

1 9 18

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

Mike Davis • Feed After Midnight @mjdavis1988.bsky.social · 2h

Some of these stories are difficult to read, but it’s important that as many people as possible know what is happening. We are 100% living in a police state. SHARE widely.
mdavis19881.substack.com/p/reddit-thr...

Reddit Thread Details Horrific ICE Encounters

These stories are happening all over the country. We CAN'T look away and we must share them.

mdavis19881.substack.com

5 4

SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊 @sebeller.bsky.social · 1h

Who benefits most from a crippled US 🤔 #traitortRUmp

4 4

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

Sandy💙 Woman stuck in a red state without a beach! @alletto.bsky.social · 2h

Isn’t their some obligation by law to protect Americans safety??? Can the Govt spread disease on purpose to fatally infect us all?

Sheryl Gay Stolberg @sherylnyt.bsky.social · 3h

BREAKING: Friday night massacre underway at CDC. Doznes of "disease detectives," high-level scientists, entire Washington staff and editors of the MMWR (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report) have all been RIFed and received the following notice:

1 2 3

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick @reichlinmelnick.bsky.social · 5h

UPDATE: Judge Perry issued an opinion explaining why she blocked the Texas National Guard deployment in Chicago.

She begins with Alexander Hamilton’s rejection of a “preposterous” idea that the Constitution lets a President deploy a State’s militia to a different State for political retribution. 🧵

OPINION AND ORDER
Since this country was founded, Americans have disagreed about the appropriate division
of power between the federal government and the fifty states that make up our Union. This
tension is a natural result of the system of federalism adopted by our Founders. And yet, not even
the Founding Father most ardently in favor of a strong federal government believed that one
state's militia could be sent to another state for the purposes of political retribution, calling such
a suggestion "inflammatory," and stating "it is impossible to believe that [a President] would employ such preposterous means to accomplish their designs." But Plaintiffs contend that such
an event has come to pass, and argue that National Guard troops from both Illinois and Texas
have been deployed to Illinois because the President of the United States wants to punish state elected officials whose policies are different from his own.

23 670 1.9K

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick @reichlinmelnick.bsky.social · 5h

Judge Perry spends four pages going over the history of the debates around the Constitution as to the proper relationship of the President to a state militia, especially after overthrowing the British, who had maintained standing armies in the colonies against their wishes.

A. The Constitution
During the Constitutional Convention of 1787, one topic of hot debate among the
Founders was how to properly scope the federal government's military powers. Indeed, among
the grievances directed against King George Ill by signatories to the Declaration of
Independence was his keeping in Times of Peace, Standing Armies, without the Consent of our Legislatures." Decl. of Independence para. 13 (U.S. 1776). Thus, while the Founders recognized that well-trained soldiers were necessary "for providing for the common defense" of our young nation, they were concerned "that a national standing Army posed an intolerable threat to
individual liberty and to the sovereignty of the separate states." Perpich v. Dept. of Defense, 496
U.S. 334, 340 (1990); see also Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 23-24 (1957) ("The Founders
envisioned the army as a necessary institution, but one dangerous to liberty if not confined within its essential bounds."). Further informing some Founders' suspicion of standing armies was the
fact that local militias of individual states had played a vital role in securing the recent victory in
the Revolutionary War. See Frederick Bemays Wiener, The Militia Clause of the Constitution,
54 Harv. L. Rev. 181, 182-83 (1940).
Another concern among some Founders was the extent of the federal government's
powers to deploy federal military forces-including federalized militia-for purposes of general
law enforcement. For instance, in response to a proposal to add language to the Constitution
which would empower the federal government to "call forth the force of the Union" against states that passed laws contravening those of the union, James Madison moved successfully for its removal, opining that such use of force against a state "would look more like a declaration of
war, than an infliction of punishment." Robert W. Coakley, The Role of Federal Military Forces
in Domestic Disorders 1789-1879 8 (citing Max Farrand, The Records of the Federal
Convention,…

come within the idea of an insurrection." Id. at 410. To this, Madison replied that "there might be
riots, to oppose the execution of the laws, which the civil power might not be sufficient to quell."
Id. (emphasis added). Patrick Henry pressed the issue, charging that granting power of "calling
the militia to enforce every execution indiscriminately" would be "unprecedented," and a
"genius of despotism." Id. at 412. To this, Madison noted the "great deal of difference between
calling forth the militia, when a combination is formed to prevent the execution of the laws, and
the sheriff or constable carrying with him a body of militia to execute them in the first instance;
which is a construction not warranted by the [Militia] clause." Id. at 415.
Confronted with such concerns, even federalist proponent Alexander Hamilton rejected
the notion that the militia could enforce domestic law, opining that given "the supposition of a
want of power to require the aid of the POSSE COMITATUS is entirely destitute of colour, it
will follow, that the conclusion which has been drawn from it, in its application to the authority of the federal government over the militia is as uncandid as it is illogical." The Federalist No. 29,
at 188 (Alexander Hamilton) (Jacob Ernest Cooke, ed., 1961). To Hamilton, then, it was nothing
more than an "exaggerated and improbable suggestion]" that the federal government would
command one state's militia to march offensively into the territories of another, given how
assuredly such conduct would invite "detestation" and "universal hatred" by the people of the
would-be usurper. Id. at 186-87.
On September 17, 1787, the U.S. Constitution was ratified. Many of the concerns debated
by the Founders reflect in its contours. Regarding the militia, the Founders chose to vest
Congress-not the President—with constitutional power "to provide for calling forth the Militia
to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions," U.S. Const. a…

disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service
of the United States." U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 16. The President, then, would be the
"Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the
several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States." U.S. Const. art. 2, § 2,
cl. 1.
That the Framers understood the Calling Forth Clause narrowly can be seen in
Congress's earliest efforts to put the clause into legislative practice. In 1792, Congress enacted
an Act to "provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress
insurrections and repel invasions." Act of May 2, 1792, 1 Stat. 264(1792). In 1795, Congress
repealed the 1792 Act and passed an amended version. Act of February 28, 1795, 1 Stat. 424
(1795). In both versions, Congress authorized the President to call upon the militia in response to
invasion or insurrection without much limitation. But for the President to call forth the militia in
cases where "the laws of the United States shall be opposed, or the execution thereof
obstructed," stricter controls were imposed. Id. Specifically, Congress authorized the calling
forth of militia only when the forces of obstruction were "too powerful to be suppressed by the
ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals" by the Act. Id.
These early efforts demonstrate contemporaneous understanding that military deployment for
purpose of executing the laws was to be an act of last resort, only after other systems had failed.
Beyond the Calling Forth Clause, other Constitutional provisions respond to Founders'
concerns about specters of military overreach. For instance, the Founders chose not to
consolidate control over the nation's standing army and naval forces into a single branch of
federal government. Power to command was vested in the President, U.S. Const. art. II, § 2, cl. 1,
but power to actually "declare War…

Navy" entrusted to Congress. U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cls. 11-13; see also The Federalist No. 24,
at 153 (Alexander Hamilton) (Jacob Ernest Cooke, ed., 1961) (noting "the whole power of
raising armies was lodged in the legislature, not in the executive") (emphasis in original).
Moreover, two of the Constitution's first ten Amendments articulate safeguards against the
military: the Second Amendment-with its assurance that well-regulated militias would be
prepared and armed to fight for the security of the states-and the Third Amendment, with its
prohibition on quartering of soldiers in times of peace.
Finally, the Constitution and its early amendments also reflect another long-standing
American principle: that the states possess a "residuary and inviolable dual sovereignty." The
Federalist No. 39, at 256 (James Madison) (Jacob Ernest Cooke, ed., 1961); see also Printz v.
United States, 521 U.S. 898, 918 (1997) ("It is incontestible that the Constitution established a
system of 'dual sovereignty"'); Carter v. Carter Coal Co., 298 U.S. 238, 294 (1936) (the
Framers "meant to carve from the general mass of legislative powers, then possessed by the
states, only such portions as it was thought wise to confer upon the federal government"). This
conception is reflected throughout the Constitution's text, but particularly in the Tenth
Amendment, which states that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the
people." U.S. Const. amend. X. These reserved and residuary powers include, among other
things, "the police power, which the Founders denied the National Government and reposed in the States." United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S 598, 618 (2000); see also Patterson v. State of Kentucky, 97 U.S. 501, 503 (1878) (the "power to establish the ordinary regulations of police has been left with the individual States, and cannot be assumed by the national government");
Carte…

6 81 330

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

Tammy Duckworth @duckworth.senate.gov · 8h

I was on the ground today in Broadview with Senator Durbin to conduct Congressional oversight on ICE’s processing facility.  As elected officials, we have a duty to ensure transparency within federal facilities. What is ICE hiding? Kristi Noem, what are you hiding?

35 330 1.1K

SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊 @sebeller.bsky.social · 3h

This was 11 years ago... What gop aholes in Congress were doing to an ACTUAL doctor nominated to be an actual Surgeon General who valued Americans' health #vaccinesmatter #firerfkjr

1 3

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

Kyle Griffin @kylegriffin1.bsky.social · 4h

The Trump administration has been spreading anti-vaccine propaganda for months. Tonight, Trump's physician announced he just received a flu shot and a COVID booster.

110 1.3K 3.2K

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

tmountaineer.bsky.social @tmountaineer.bsky.social · 13h

I will attend the No Kings rally BECAUSE I Love America.

5 21 220

SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊 @sebeller.bsky.social · 4h

Is he admitting he and the regime think "America" is fascist? Lil mikey is a traitorous POS. Can't wait for that angry elf to be brought to justice.

#antifascism #nokings

SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊 @sebeller.bsky.social · 7h

What better place to spy 🤷🤦🤬

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

Kira @kiragooddog.bsky.social · 8h

This is a message for you, Senator. Federal employees want the shutdown to last until the Administration is forced to start following the law:

Dave Levitan @davelevitan.bsky.social · 8h

One fed employee told me the internal conversations feel very different from previous shutdowns.

www.gravityisgone.com/federal-empl...

"Every other fed I've talked to agrees how much it sucks to be furloughed, but also that this shutdown needs to continue until the administration starts respecting the rule of law," said a NOAA employee. "Even the conservative Republicans."

4 17

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

Senator Dick Durbin @durbin.senate.gov · 8h

We’re outside of the Broadview ICE facility.

It’s clearer than ever before.

What’s happening in Illinois is an unprecedented, unlawful abuse of power.

20 210 590

SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊 @sebeller.bsky.social · 7h

And Roosevelt and Eisenhower...

SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊 @sebeller.bsky.social · 7h

And Obama and Hillary and...🤬

SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊 @sebeller.bsky.social · 7h

All groundless, of course. The fascists in the regime just revel in the bs process of fucking up people's lives 🤬 #crueltyisthepoint

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

Elizabeth Cronise McLaughlin @ecmclaughlin.bsky.social · 10h

MSNBC is reporting that the DOJ is seeking an indictment of John Bolton.

I can’t stand that guy, and still: THIS IS SO WRONG.

270 1.1K 6.5K

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

Schooley @schooley.bsky.social · 8h

One of the problems with the media's undercoverage of the previous enormous and peaceful protests this year is it allows Republicans to fear monger big protests as if they haven't been frequent and fine.

5 24 130

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

Yozoo @yozootoo.bsky.social · 10h

from the mistreatment and dismissal of federal workers, to the continued diminishment and defunding of the VA, combined with repeated ICE abuses directed at Hispanic veterans, this administration openly hates veterans in a way I have never seen before in US politics.

2 8

SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊 @sebeller.bsky.social · 7h

This dad should be a multi-millionaire by the time he's done suing the F out of all the fascists in the regime responsible.

1 19

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

Josh Marshall @joshtpm.bsky.social · 8h

Just noting the fine print

14 97 310

SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊 @sebeller.bsky.social · 8h

Willing to bet "private security" = erik prince &/or mike flynn 🤬🤬🤬

1 1 6

Reposted by SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊

ᑕᕼᗴᖇYᒪ @cheryl2877.bsky.social · 9h

Please ~ take a minute …

This is a MUST listen to 💙

26 240 370

SE "Drag Me to" Beller 🎃💀🔥✍️🌊 @sebeller.bsky.social · 8h

i wouldn't be surprised if they told the kid to fire blanks and he improvised... then they took him out to cover it all up. Regardless, none of that bs should've distracted from the fact this orange pos felon should NEVER have been allowed to run again much less been voted back into power.