I’m interested in being my favorite podcaster’s suspiciously young second wife but if he doesn’t act soon i’m going to get too old for it to be suspicious. MY YOUTH IS FLEETING!
December 10, 2025 at 5:25 PM
I’m interested in being my favorite podcaster’s suspiciously young second wife but if he doesn’t act soon i’m going to get too old for it to be suspicious. MY YOUTH IS FLEETING!
Reposted by lex
in this episode i say what the liberal media has been afraid to say about the White House ballroom: every boy deserves a place where he can dance.
This week’s premium episode is about the federal judges speaking out against the Supreme Court, and Amy Coney Barrett’s bizarre press tour.
Panic! In The Federal Judiciary [SUBSCRIBER-ONLY] | 5-4
Get more from 5-4 on Patreon
www.patreon.com
October 28, 2025 at 4:26 PM
in this episode i say what the liberal media has been afraid to say about the White House ballroom: every boy deserves a place where he can dance.
So guys how are we coping with our exes leaving us for someone hotter, cooler, and younger than us. Any ideas?
October 10, 2025 at 11:33 PM
So guys how are we coping with our exes leaving us for someone hotter, cooler, and younger than us. Any ideas?
Reposted by lex
becoming fully beaudrillard pilled. realizing the entire project of 5-4 has been in many ways detailing how conservatives have built a simulation of academic and legal scholarship, in order to live in a hyperreal world in which the constitution demands white supremacy
September 19, 2025 at 11:35 AM
becoming fully beaudrillard pilled. realizing the entire project of 5-4 has been in many ways detailing how conservatives have built a simulation of academic and legal scholarship, in order to live in a hyperreal world in which the constitution demands white supremacy
Reposted by lex
it’s the first day of the bar exam so I’m bumping this
July 29, 2025 at 3:43 PM
it’s the first day of the bar exam so I’m bumping this
Reposted by lex
society if he had taken the bus
July 27, 2025 at 2:47 PM
society if he had taken the bus
Reposted by lex
New record for the point at which I stopped reading an Atlantic article
www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...
www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...
July 23, 2025 at 3:21 PM
New record for the point at which I stopped reading an Atlantic article
www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...
www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...
Reposted by lex
Characterizing a move from feminism to critical theory as an “ascent.” Hmm.
July 13, 2025 at 11:34 PM
Characterizing a move from feminism to critical theory as an “ascent.” Hmm.
Reposted by lex
when this case dropped there were a bunch of legal commenters, liberals included, arguing that it wasn’t a big deal. this is our comprehensive explanation of why those people are stupid and wrong.
This week’s episode is Trump v. CASA, where the Court addressed Trump’s illegal birthright citizenship order by ignoring the issue entirely.
Trump v. CASA, Inc.
Podcast Episode · 5-4 · 07/08/2025 · 1h 3m
podcasts.apple.com
July 8, 2025 at 4:47 PM
when this case dropped there were a bunch of legal commenters, liberals included, arguing that it wasn’t a big deal. this is our comprehensive explanation of why those people are stupid and wrong.
Reposted by lex
I wish there were more jokes on this app...for me to get mad at!
July 8, 2025 at 11:06 PM
I wish there were more jokes on this app...for me to get mad at!
Reposted by lex
the question of whether trans sports bans violate equal protection has essentially been answered by Skrmetti, which makes it feel like they're taking up the issue to run a culture war victory lap
July 3, 2025 at 3:38 PM
the question of whether trans sports bans violate equal protection has essentially been answered by Skrmetti, which makes it feel like they're taking up the issue to run a culture war victory lap
Reposted by lex
one thing that is important to emphasize at that this is just republican governance at work! this is what happens when you give republicans power in washington!
Final vote. 50-50. VP breaks the tie.
One single GOP Senator could have stopped this abomination. Saved millions of parents from watching their child go hungry. Saved the lives destroyed when Medicaid disappears.
They will all live forever with the horror of this bill.
One single GOP Senator could have stopped this abomination. Saved millions of parents from watching their child go hungry. Saved the lives destroyed when Medicaid disappears.
They will all live forever with the horror of this bill.
July 1, 2025 at 4:19 PM
one thing that is important to emphasize at that this is just republican governance at work! this is what happens when you give republicans power in washington!
Reposted by lex
if (more likely when) this bill passes it will fundamentally alter the character of the federal government. the relationship between resident and government fully, irrevocably changed, and there’s no going back.
July 1, 2025 at 7:30 PM
if (more likely when) this bill passes it will fundamentally alter the character of the federal government. the relationship between resident and government fully, irrevocably changed, and there’s no going back.
A fool and his money are one big party
June 30, 2025 at 5:50 PM
A fool and his money are one big party
Reposted by lex
@fivefourpod.bsky.social What do we do
June 27, 2025 at 5:00 PM
@fivefourpod.bsky.social What do we do
Reposted by lex
let the catastrophizing begin!
there’s no point in catastrophizing about a decision we haven’t even gotten yet, but it really cannot be overstated enough just how bad the worst case scenario is with birthright citizenship is. like “any mere semblance of self-governance is over” is one of the plausible outcomes
June 27, 2025 at 2:18 PM
let the catastrophizing begin!
Reposted by lex
one of the projects of the court is to expand the ability of states to pursue reactionary ends and constrain the ability of the federal government to set minimum standards *or* of democratic-led states to expand upon existing rights
🚨By a 6–3 vote, the Supreme Court ALLOWS states to defund Planned Parenthood, holding that Medicaid does not give patients a right to obtain care from its providers. All three liberals dissent. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...
June 26, 2025 at 2:20 PM
one of the projects of the court is to expand the ability of states to pursue reactionary ends and constrain the ability of the federal government to set minimum standards *or* of democratic-led states to expand upon existing rights
Reposted by lex
we took this week off, but next week is United States v. Skrmetti
June 24, 2025 at 7:29 PM
we took this week off, but next week is United States v. Skrmetti
Reposted by lex
Justice Jackson, dissenting in the California/EPA/electric vehicles case, did not hold back: "This case gives fodder to the unfortunate perception that moneyed interests enjoy an easier road to relief in this Court than ordinary citizens."
www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...
www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...
![JUSTICE JACKSON, dissenting. Standing is a constitutional doctrine meant to promote judicial restraint. By design, it “ ‘prevent[s] the judicial process from being used to usurp the powers of the political branches’ ” and “helps safeguard the Judiciary’s proper— and properly limited—role in our constitutional system.” United States v. Texas, 599 U. S. 670, 675–676 (2023). But standing doctrine cannot serve that important purpose if the Judiciary fails to apply it evenhandedly. When courts adjust standing requirements to let certain litigants challenge the actions of the political branches but preclude suits by others with similar injuries, standing doctrine cannot perform its constraining function. Over time, such selectivity begets judicial overreach and erodes public trust in the impartiality of judicial decisionmaking. Today’s ruling runs the risk of setting us down that path. The Court shelves its usual case-selection standards to revive a fuel-industry lawsuit that all agree will soon be moot (and is largely moot already). And it rests its decision on a theory of standing that the Court has refused to apply in cases brought by less powerful plaintiffs. This case gives fodder to the unfortunate perception that moneyed interests enjoy an easier road to relief in this Court than ordinary citizens. Because the Court had ample opportunity to avoid that result, I respectfully dissent.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:wovz3whdkughp6decczypkqq/bafkreifn3tdjneeclepdgd4dcalbveotr4w25hwqf2q4iq3tym4wx6unvm@jpeg)
June 20, 2025 at 2:30 PM
Justice Jackson, dissenting in the California/EPA/electric vehicles case, did not hold back: "This case gives fodder to the unfortunate perception that moneyed interests enjoy an easier road to relief in this Court than ordinary citizens."
www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...
www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...
Reposted by lex
Plessy v. Ferguson for trans people
🚨By a 6–3 vote, the Supreme Court UPHOLDS Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for minors, concluding that it does NOT discriminate on the basis of sex, is not subject to heightened scrutiny, and survives rational basis review. All three liberals dissent. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...
June 18, 2025 at 2:37 PM
Plessy v. Ferguson for trans people
Reposted by lex
saying that someone “no longer has any legal interests” because they’re dead is the sort of claim you might wanna run by a lawyer before publishing in The Atlantic
The Atlantic should be ashamed of publishing this nightmare piece from Liz Bruenig, whose callous dismissal of Adriana Smith's dignity is one of the most shocking things I've ever read.
June 17, 2025 at 2:01 AM
saying that someone “no longer has any legal interests” because they’re dead is the sort of claim you might wanna run by a lawyer before publishing in The Atlantic
Reposted by lex
the actual story here is that the leftmost conservative on the bench right now is substantially to the right of Anthony Kennedy
June 15, 2025 at 7:07 PM
the actual story here is that the leftmost conservative on the bench right now is substantially to the right of Anthony Kennedy
Reposted by lex
these numbers are a decent indication that the whole "the left is ostracizing young men" thing is, if not entirely fictional, at least very overblown
How do famous right-wing influencers actually poll with young men in 2025?
Rogan: 27% favorable, 35% unfavorable, 45% don't know/never heard of
Theo Von: 21% fav, 16% unfav, 55% dk
Andrew Tate: 12% fav, 47% unfav, 36% dk
Source: iop.harvard.edu/youth-poll/5...
Rogan: 27% favorable, 35% unfavorable, 45% don't know/never heard of
Theo Von: 21% fav, 16% unfav, 55% dk
Andrew Tate: 12% fav, 47% unfav, 36% dk
Source: iop.harvard.edu/youth-poll/5...
50th Edition - Spring 2025
A new national poll from the Institute of Politics at Harvard Kennedy School reveals a generation navigating financial hardship, frayed social bond
iop.harvard.edu
May 28, 2025 at 10:56 PM
these numbers are a decent indication that the whole "the left is ostracizing young men" thing is, if not entirely fictional, at least very overblown
Reposted by lex
73 year old Georgetown Law Professor Randy Barnett is one of the chief architects of the claim that the birthright citizenship clause of the 14th amendment doesn't provide for birthright citizenship
May 23, 2025 at 2:25 PM
73 year old Georgetown Law Professor Randy Barnett is one of the chief architects of the claim that the birthright citizenship clause of the 14th amendment doesn't provide for birthright citizenship