Don Zeko
@donzeko.bsky.social
Public defender in the South, politics obsessive, nerd stuff enthusiast. Also a dad, although I'm trying to respect the privacy of my increasingly feral children.
Reposted by Don Zeko
As with everything he says, this is wildly uninformed. Formula keeps getting better and saves lives. And modern research indicates that outcomes are roughly the same. There are reasons to breastfeed but your child isn’t suffering if you don’t
RFK Jr: "All of the ingenuity of corporate America has not produced an infant formula that is superior in nutrition and all the qualities that we want to the infant formula that God made, which is the infant formula in a mother's breast."
December 8, 2025 at 10:14 PM
As with everything he says, this is wildly uninformed. Formula keeps getting better and saves lives. And modern research indicates that outcomes are roughly the same. There are reasons to breastfeed but your child isn’t suffering if you don’t
YES, ODD IS ONE WORD FOR IT
Duffy: "It's maybe a little odd for three guys to talk about nursing and options for nursing, but ...
December 8, 2025 at 8:55 PM
YES, ODD IS ONE WORD FOR IT
Reposted by Don Zeko
I like to picture George Washington in a tuxedo T-shirt. 'Cause it says like, “I wanna be formal but I'm here to party too.” I like to party, so I like my George Washington to party.
I love that they've got him wearing a t-shirt like he's a tech-bro founder, when one of the single best established things about George Washington was that he was fussy about propriety and proper appearances. He'd have worn a suit.
December 8, 2025 at 8:13 PM
I like to picture George Washington in a tuxedo T-shirt. 'Cause it says like, “I wanna be formal but I'm here to party too.” I like to party, so I like my George Washington to party.
Reposted by Don Zeko
Supreme Court oral argument this morning, in sum
Sotomayor: you're asking us to destroy the foundation of government (derogatory)
Gorsuch: you're asking us to destroy the foundation of government (complimentary)
Sotomayor: you're asking us to destroy the foundation of government (derogatory)
Gorsuch: you're asking us to destroy the foundation of government (complimentary)
December 8, 2025 at 3:48 PM
Supreme Court oral argument this morning, in sum
Sotomayor: you're asking us to destroy the foundation of government (derogatory)
Gorsuch: you're asking us to destroy the foundation of government (complimentary)
Sotomayor: you're asking us to destroy the foundation of government (derogatory)
Gorsuch: you're asking us to destroy the foundation of government (complimentary)
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is very concerned that maybe every single executive agency violated separation of powers
Trump: "I'm delighted to announce this afternoon that the US will be taking a small portion of the hundreds of billions of dollars we receive in tariffs ... and we're going to be giving and providing it to the farmers in economic assistance. We love our farmers. The farmers like me ... $12 billion"
December 8, 2025 at 8:08 PM
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is very concerned that maybe every single executive agency violated separation of powers
Reposted by Don Zeko
The Trump administration has made me a flagrant moralist in a way that has led me to tossing aside years of snark, and you know, I'm good with that. It's time to talk about what being a good person means; about why it's good to signal virtue, why it's good to press for values, not spectacle.
we all got cowed into avoiding "virtue signaling" as if the public affirmation of socially agreed upon ethical principles was somehow cringey instead of a significant part of what a "society" even is. now all there's left is vice signaling, and it's reshaping society.
December 8, 2025 at 6:20 PM
The Trump administration has made me a flagrant moralist in a way that has led me to tossing aside years of snark, and you know, I'm good with that. It's time to talk about what being a good person means; about why it's good to signal virtue, why it's good to press for values, not spectacle.
Reposted by Don Zeko
again i am struck by how to so many its easier to believe in the end of american democracy than the end of the 6th party system
December 8, 2025 at 6:02 PM
again i am struck by how to so many its easier to believe in the end of american democracy than the end of the 6th party system
Reposted by Don Zeko
When I say "this thing Trump is doing is worse than past actions in these specific ways," I'm not arguing "the past actions were good."
One challenge with getting people to recognize the moment we're in is can't-happen-here complacency. Another is "there is only bad, there's no such thing as worse."
One challenge with getting people to recognize the moment we're in is can't-happen-here complacency. Another is "there is only bad, there's no such thing as worse."
America got “the president is killing terrorists, don’t question it” in the 2000s too. But unlike now:
-The US had been attacked
-Al Qaeda was a terrorist group and planned more attacks
-They were in areas the US military did not freely operate, where arrest was risky
-Congress authorized the action
-The US had been attacked
-Al Qaeda was a terrorist group and planned more attacks
-They were in areas the US military did not freely operate, where arrest was risky
-Congress authorized the action
December 8, 2025 at 4:51 PM
When I say "this thing Trump is doing is worse than past actions in these specific ways," I'm not arguing "the past actions were good."
One challenge with getting people to recognize the moment we're in is can't-happen-here complacency. Another is "there is only bad, there's no such thing as worse."
One challenge with getting people to recognize the moment we're in is can't-happen-here complacency. Another is "there is only bad, there's no such thing as worse."
Every new order, argument, and decision drives the point home: any future Democratic administration will be unable to make policy if nothing is done about SCOTUS
December 8, 2025 at 4:05 PM
Every new order, argument, and decision drives the point home: any future Democratic administration will be unable to make policy if nothing is done about SCOTUS
Reposted by Don Zeko
The practical effect of overturning Humphrey’s will be that Republican presidents can stack the formerly independent agencies with their copartisans and SCOTUS will be cool with everything they do but when a Dem POTUS does the same Roberts et al will declare all those agencies’ actions unlawful.
In a memo John Roberts wrote just 4 yrs out of law school, he said the “time may be ripe to reconsider the existence” of independent agencies & bring them back into the executive branch. Now he’s poised to end what he has long called “a constitutional anomaly.”
www.nytimes.com/2025/12/07/u...
www.nytimes.com/2025/12/07/u...
Conservative Project at Supreme Court Meets Trump’s Push to Oust Officials
www.nytimes.com
December 8, 2025 at 12:07 AM
The practical effect of overturning Humphrey’s will be that Republican presidents can stack the formerly independent agencies with their copartisans and SCOTUS will be cool with everything they do but when a Dem POTUS does the same Roberts et al will declare all those agencies’ actions unlawful.
Reposted by Don Zeko
Somewhere out there are tens of thousands of parents who are going to watch their child die of preventable liver disease. And most of them supported and will continue to support the man who just sent their children to the grave.
December 8, 2025 at 1:37 AM
Somewhere out there are tens of thousands of parents who are going to watch their child die of preventable liver disease. And most of them supported and will continue to support the man who just sent their children to the grave.
Has anybody shown this to Thomas Friedman
It's just insane that no pilot thought of this route before AI brilliantly came up with it!!!!!!!!
December 7, 2025 at 9:41 PM
Has anybody shown this to Thomas Friedman
Reposted by Don Zeko
“mr [fedsoc guy #15] is a very serious legal scholar, with whom i disagree with”
mr fedsoc guy #15: “the 13th amendment was never intended to abolish slavery, if you read contemporaneous sources, many…”
mr fedsoc guy #15: “the 13th amendment was never intended to abolish slavery, if you read contemporaneous sources, many…”
December 7, 2025 at 9:14 PM
“mr [fedsoc guy #15] is a very serious legal scholar, with whom i disagree with”
mr fedsoc guy #15: “the 13th amendment was never intended to abolish slavery, if you read contemporaneous sources, many…”
mr fedsoc guy #15: “the 13th amendment was never intended to abolish slavery, if you read contemporaneous sources, many…”
Reposted by Don Zeko
bad actors like wurman are why i think it is important to place the birthright clause in the full context of section 1 and section 1 in the context of both dred scott and the two decades of antislavery and abolitionist agitation and political thinking that proceeded it
The evidence is the text. All you have to do is read the Constitution.
December 7, 2025 at 7:09 PM
bad actors like wurman are why i think it is important to place the birthright clause in the full context of section 1 and section 1 in the context of both dred scott and the two decades of antislavery and abolitionist agitation and political thinking that proceeded it
Reposted by Don Zeko
With a new ceiling of 7,500 refugee admissions per year *total from the whole world,* even before the additional crackdown in the last couple of weeks, the administration is actually aiming to be far *more* restrictive than the US was in that shameful era.
December 7, 2025 at 12:47 PM
With a new ceiling of 7,500 refugee admissions per year *total from the whole world,* even before the additional crackdown in the last couple of weeks, the administration is actually aiming to be far *more* restrictive than the US was in that shameful era.
Reposted by Don Zeko
Reposted by Don Zeko
It continues to be amazing that the US wealthiest person, and significant military contractor can be a wildly racist white supremacist who actively is hostile to US national interests and nobody in the mainstream even discusses it.
Elon Musk is against the European Union being the European Union —he posted this after X (fka Twitter) was fined for violations of the EU’s Digital Services Act.
December 6, 2025 at 8:50 PM
It continues to be amazing that the US wealthiest person, and significant military contractor can be a wildly racist white supremacist who actively is hostile to US national interests and nobody in the mainstream even discusses it.
Reposted by Don Zeko
again, the supreme court did not write the constitution (or the declaration) and—despite what you may think—they don't have the monopoly on the interpretation of those documents.
the people have a say, and if the court is out of step with the people, that's a problem for the court, not the governed
the people have a say, and if the court is out of step with the people, that's a problem for the court, not the governed
i think to understand the meaning of the birthright citizenship clause to the framers of the 14th amendment, you have to understand significance of dred scott to the civil war republican party. dred scott wasn't just a bad ruling, it was understood as a rejection of the declaration itself.
December 6, 2025 at 8:28 PM
again, the supreme court did not write the constitution (or the declaration) and—despite what you may think—they don't have the monopoly on the interpretation of those documents.
the people have a say, and if the court is out of step with the people, that's a problem for the court, not the governed
the people have a say, and if the court is out of step with the people, that's a problem for the court, not the governed
Reposted by Don Zeko
i think to understand the meaning of the birthright citizenship clause to the framers of the 14th amendment, you have to understand significance of dred scott to the civil war republican party. dred scott wasn't just a bad ruling, it was understood as a rejection of the declaration itself.
December 6, 2025 at 6:03 PM
i think to understand the meaning of the birthright citizenship clause to the framers of the 14th amendment, you have to understand significance of dred scott to the civil war republican party. dred scott wasn't just a bad ruling, it was understood as a rejection of the declaration itself.
Reposted by Don Zeko
people died for birthright citizenship. i get that it’s more fun to be a pundit when your team has the white house and you get to brag to friends about visiting the oval office; but what i’m wondering is if maybe that’s actually not a good reason to throw away something we fought a civil war to win?
December 6, 2025 at 4:39 PM
people died for birthright citizenship. i get that it’s more fun to be a pundit when your team has the white house and you get to brag to friends about visiting the oval office; but what i’m wondering is if maybe that’s actually not a good reason to throw away something we fought a civil war to win?
Reposted by Don Zeko
The states should also defy it, not only on principle but because it's literally impossible, our vital records system simply does not even contain the information needed to know if anybody is or isn't in the categories Trump made up in his decree.
I feel like if the Court tries to nullify birthright citizenship then House Democrats should commit to impeaching all the Republican justices as soon as they get a majority. Even if the Senate won’t convict, make them make a spectacle out of it.
December 6, 2025 at 7:25 AM
The states should also defy it, not only on principle but because it's literally impossible, our vital records system simply does not even contain the information needed to know if anybody is or isn't in the categories Trump made up in his decree.
My theory, fwiw, is that Supreme Court Justices are not immune to Twitter brain poisoning. I suspect all six have horrific information environments and have therefore lost the ability to understand the people who don't agree with them.
The part that I can't figure out is what John Roberts thinks he is doing. He used to seem to be a judge who was very attentive to appearances, I think on a theory that you can't draw too much attention to yourself without undermining your ability to continue to shape the law.
Every legal story now is either
Ancient Circuit Judge Delivers Crystal Clear 100 Page Rebuke To Trumpist Overreach
or
In Unsigned Shadow Docket Decision, 6-3 Majority Declares Trump Can Hunt People For Sport
Ancient Circuit Judge Delivers Crystal Clear 100 Page Rebuke To Trumpist Overreach
or
In Unsigned Shadow Docket Decision, 6-3 Majority Declares Trump Can Hunt People For Sport
December 5, 2025 at 8:09 PM
My theory, fwiw, is that Supreme Court Justices are not immune to Twitter brain poisoning. I suspect all six have horrific information environments and have therefore lost the ability to understand the people who don't agree with them.
The part that I can't figure out is what John Roberts thinks he is doing. He used to seem to be a judge who was very attentive to appearances, I think on a theory that you can't draw too much attention to yourself without undermining your ability to continue to shape the law.
Every legal story now is either
Ancient Circuit Judge Delivers Crystal Clear 100 Page Rebuke To Trumpist Overreach
or
In Unsigned Shadow Docket Decision, 6-3 Majority Declares Trump Can Hunt People For Sport
Ancient Circuit Judge Delivers Crystal Clear 100 Page Rebuke To Trumpist Overreach
or
In Unsigned Shadow Docket Decision, 6-3 Majority Declares Trump Can Hunt People For Sport
December 5, 2025 at 7:50 PM
The part that I can't figure out is what John Roberts thinks he is doing. He used to seem to be a judge who was very attentive to appearances, I think on a theory that you can't draw too much attention to yourself without undermining your ability to continue to shape the law.
Reposted by Don Zeko
Gotta update the old "politicians in robes" adage because honestly most politicians would hesitate to light their own perceived legitimacy on fire the way this Court has.
December 5, 2025 at 12:16 AM
Gotta update the old "politicians in robes" adage because honestly most politicians would hesitate to light their own perceived legitimacy on fire the way this Court has.
Reposted by Don Zeko
The funny thing is that he used to be way more timid about doing shit like this. And not just him. SCOTUS Republicans have been brain-poisoning themselves on insane weird far-right shit, in all likelihood (and even Thomas and Alito's preexisting cases of this accelerated horribly in the past decade)
For decades, supposed experts would tell us how moderate and reasonable John Roberts was. Now it's clear that Roberts is one of the main people dragging us into a dictatorship.
December 5, 2025 at 12:17 AM
The funny thing is that he used to be way more timid about doing shit like this. And not just him. SCOTUS Republicans have been brain-poisoning themselves on insane weird far-right shit, in all likelihood (and even Thomas and Alito's preexisting cases of this accelerated horribly in the past decade)