@franklucchesesoto.bsky.social
Reposted
Greaseman is back on Facebook!
January 26, 2026 at 3:35 AM
Greaseman is back on Facebook!
Reposted
being heckled at a restaurant for being in the gestapo and being beat up by 6 gestapo agents, bear sprayed, and shot 8 times with zero accountability is equivalent to these freaks
January 26, 2026 at 3:35 AM
being heckled at a restaurant for being in the gestapo and being beat up by 6 gestapo agents, bear sprayed, and shot 8 times with zero accountability is equivalent to these freaks
Reposted
Call your reps. Let them know that if they vote for ICE funding, you will not vote for them ever again.
Representatives need to feel the heat. NO on ICE funding. No excuses.
Representatives need to feel the heat. NO on ICE funding. No excuses.
So the House is going to vote TOMORROW on the DHS funding bill that includes funding for ICE.
There's a real chance we can get Dems to vote NO on any bill with ICE funding to sink it.
Once it goes to the Senate we likely lose this chance.
24 hours. Go.
www.fightforthefuture.org/actions/no-f...
There's a real chance we can get Dems to vote NO on any bill with ICE funding to sink it.
Once it goes to the Senate we likely lose this chance.
24 hours. Go.
www.fightforthefuture.org/actions/no-f...
No Funding for ICE Surveillance Tech!
www.fightforthefuture.org
January 22, 2026 at 12:12 AM
Call your reps. Let them know that if they vote for ICE funding, you will not vote for them ever again.
Representatives need to feel the heat. NO on ICE funding. No excuses.
Representatives need to feel the heat. NO on ICE funding. No excuses.
Reposted
i am shook by the seyfried snub
January 22, 2026 at 2:01 PM
i am shook by the seyfried snub
Reposted
while we’re still talking about 2016, i just want people to know that everyone in my class tried to make our homecoming theme “harambe” but the administration overruled it
January 22, 2026 at 3:05 PM
while we’re still talking about 2016, i just want people to know that everyone in my class tried to make our homecoming theme “harambe” but the administration overruled it
Reposted
Proud to earn the endorsement of the Illinois Nurses Association, our first labor endorsement!
Nurses know what happens when profit comes before people. I’m honored to stand with them and fight for patients, workers, and families.
Nurses know what happens when profit comes before people. I’m honored to stand with them and fight for patients, workers, and families.
January 21, 2026 at 10:25 PM
Proud to earn the endorsement of the Illinois Nurses Association, our first labor endorsement!
Nurses know what happens when profit comes before people. I’m honored to stand with them and fight for patients, workers, and families.
Nurses know what happens when profit comes before people. I’m honored to stand with them and fight for patients, workers, and families.
Reposted
STARTING NOW:
You can virtually attend the West Ridge Candidate Forum me and 5 other candidates will speak at!
Join us here: us06web.zoom.us/j/8246717981...
You can virtually attend the West Ridge Candidate Forum me and 5 other candidates will speak at!
Join us here: us06web.zoom.us/j/8246717981...
January 16, 2026 at 12:37 AM
STARTING NOW:
You can virtually attend the West Ridge Candidate Forum me and 5 other candidates will speak at!
Join us here: us06web.zoom.us/j/8246717981...
You can virtually attend the West Ridge Candidate Forum me and 5 other candidates will speak at!
Join us here: us06web.zoom.us/j/8246717981...
Reposted
Xavier Scott —> Illinois
January 16, 2026 at 2:19 AM
Xavier Scott —> Illinois
Reposted
A reminder that in the Texas case, Alito—joined by Thomas and Gorsuch—said he thought the California map was drawn on the basis of politics, not race, which is permissible. Let’s see if those justices stick to that position if this goes to the shadow docket.
BREAKING: Three-judge panel, on a 2-1 vote, refuses to block California from using its mid-decade redistricting map. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
January 14, 2026 at 9:18 PM
A reminder that in the Texas case, Alito—joined by Thomas and Gorsuch—said he thought the California map was drawn on the basis of politics, not race, which is permissible. Let’s see if those justices stick to that position if this goes to the shadow docket.
Reposted
I appreciate this perspective.
I did not appreciate when @gallego.senate.gov repeatedly voted to nullify D.C.'s own criminal laws. Why did he facilitate the suppression of the people of D.C.? Why don't we also deserve the right to govern ourselves?
I did not appreciate when @gallego.senate.gov repeatedly voted to nullify D.C.'s own criminal laws. Why did he facilitate the suppression of the people of D.C.? Why don't we also deserve the right to govern ourselves?
Gallego: "What we're seeing in MN isn't immigration enforcement. It is suppression. It is suppression of the people of MN. It is using ICE & CBP and all these other people to basically scare the people of MN. There's gonna have to be a lot of things that should we get power we're gonna have to fix"
January 15, 2026 at 4:46 PM
I appreciate this perspective.
I did not appreciate when @gallego.senate.gov repeatedly voted to nullify D.C.'s own criminal laws. Why did he facilitate the suppression of the people of D.C.? Why don't we also deserve the right to govern ourselves?
I did not appreciate when @gallego.senate.gov repeatedly voted to nullify D.C.'s own criminal laws. Why did he facilitate the suppression of the people of D.C.? Why don't we also deserve the right to govern ourselves?
Reposted
I finally had a chance to digest this thread and I actually agree with much it … up to the point that it accuses me of refusing to engage with differing views and trying to “burn it all down!” I think Amicus listeners know that’s untrue; we actually get flak for being too soft on the court.
Staunch partisans like Mark take a different path. They make no effort to engage with people with different views—even people left-of-center who but aren't trying to burn it all down!
January 14, 2026 at 8:07 PM
I finally had a chance to digest this thread and I actually agree with much it … up to the point that it accuses me of refusing to engage with differing views and trying to “burn it all down!” I think Amicus listeners know that’s untrue; we actually get flak for being too soft on the court.
Reposted
I've seen it argued that the longer SCOTUS takes to hand down the tariffs ruling, the likelier Trump is to win. I think that's wrong. There are too many unknown factors at play, including dissenters potentially dragging their feet. There's no obvious deadline for a decision—it'll come when it comes.
January 14, 2026 at 4:17 PM
I've seen it argued that the longer SCOTUS takes to hand down the tariffs ruling, the likelier Trump is to win. I think that's wrong. There are too many unknown factors at play, including dissenters potentially dragging their feet. There's no obvious deadline for a decision—it'll come when it comes.
Reposted
Anyway: I tend to think SCOTUS will ultimately uphold state laws that require the counting of late-arriving mail ballots, and that's where the real action is. Today's decision just sets the stage for it.
January 14, 2026 at 3:26 PM
Anyway: I tend to think SCOTUS will ultimately uphold state laws that require the counting of late-arriving mail ballots, and that's where the real action is. Today's decision just sets the stage for it.
Reposted
In dissent, Jackson (joined by Sotomayor) basically says: Why are we making it easier for Republicans to challenge vote-counting rules and other election laws while making it harder for normal people to get their cases heard in federal court? www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...
![I am all for simplifying our standing law. See ante, at 10.
But I am against doing so selectively; either Article III
standing requires an actual or imminent injury in fact that
is particularized to the plaintiff, or it does not. Bost has
plainly failed to allege facts that support an inference of
standing under our established precedents. By carving out
a bespoke rule for candidate-plaintiffs—granting them
standing “to challenge the rules that govern the counting of
votes,” simply and solely because they are “candidate[s]” for
office, ibid.—the Court now complicates and destabilizes
both our standing law and America’s electoral processes.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreiganrqodm566pnglhzdsv7qi5z6sotx6m4a6ickov757jo6ia4hpi@jpeg)
January 14, 2026 at 3:24 PM
In dissent, Jackson (joined by Sotomayor) basically says: Why are we making it easier for Republicans to challenge vote-counting rules and other election laws while making it harder for normal people to get their cases heard in federal court? www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...
Reposted
Tentatively I think Barrett/Kagan are right, but as a practical matter I doubt there's a real difference between their position and the majority's. A candidate who opposes an election rule can almost always articulate some reason why it might incur higher campaign costs and legal fees.
January 14, 2026 at 3:20 PM
Tentatively I think Barrett/Kagan are right, but as a practical matter I doubt there's a real difference between their position and the majority's. A candidate who opposes an election rule can almost always articulate some reason why it might incur higher campaign costs and legal fees.
Reposted
An interesting split: A five-justice majority creates a bespoke standing rule that candidates can basically always challenge election rules. Barrett, joined by Kagan, rejects this, but says candidates have standing when an election rule will require them to spend money (like legal fees).
January 14, 2026 at 3:19 PM
An interesting split: A five-justice majority creates a bespoke standing rule that candidates can basically always challenge election rules. Barrett, joined by Kagan, rejects this, but says candidates have standing when an election rule will require them to spend money (like legal fees).
Reposted
This was a totally predictable ruling and I'm fine with it—it simply sets the stage for the big mail ballot case coming up, which asks whether state laws permitting the tabulation of late-arriving mail ballots violate federal law. (They don't, but the 5th Circuit said they do.)
January 14, 2026 at 3:15 PM
This was a totally predictable ruling and I'm fine with it—it simply sets the stage for the big mail ballot case coming up, which asks whether state laws permitting the tabulation of late-arriving mail ballots violate federal law. (They don't, but the 5th Circuit said they do.)
Reposted
The Supreme Court's third and FINAL decision of the day is Bost v. Illinois, holding 7–2 that candidates have standing to challenge laws that require the counting of mail ballots sent by Election Day but arriving shortly thereafter. Jackson and Sotomayor dissent. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...
January 14, 2026 at 3:14 PM
The Supreme Court's third and FINAL decision of the day is Bost v. Illinois, holding 7–2 that candidates have standing to challenge laws that require the counting of mail ballots sent by Election Day but arriving shortly thereafter. Jackson and Sotomayor dissent. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...
Reposted
The people of Iran yearn to be free from a brutal theocracy. Thousands have been killed in the past week for standing up to tyranny, and we owe them our full support.
Recklessly dropping bombs is not the answer — we produced this regime by deposing an elected government.
tinyurl.com/4ukxadd7
Recklessly dropping bombs is not the answer — we produced this regime by deposing an elected government.
tinyurl.com/4ukxadd7
Iran warns of retaliation if Trump strikes, US withdraws some personnel from regional bases
The United States is withdrawing some personnel from bases in the Middle East, a U.S. official said, after a senior Iranian official said Tehran had warned neighbours it would hit American bases if Wa...
www.reuters.com
January 14, 2026 at 2:54 PM
The people of Iran yearn to be free from a brutal theocracy. Thousands have been killed in the past week for standing up to tyranny, and we owe them our full support.
Recklessly dropping bombs is not the answer — we produced this regime by deposing an elected government.
tinyurl.com/4ukxadd7
Recklessly dropping bombs is not the answer — we produced this regime by deposing an elected government.
tinyurl.com/4ukxadd7
Reposted
In the pantheon of absurdities from the dc gossip media, this has to be among the worst
This isn't horse race politics FFS. It's potentially world war
This isn't horse race politics FFS. It's potentially world war
Denmark, Greenland failed to win the Trump team over
Denmark, Greenland failed to win the Trump team over
The U.S. allies hoped meeting senior Trump officials would diffuse tensions and tough talk on Greenland. It didn’t.
dlvr.it
January 14, 2026 at 8:43 PM
In the pantheon of absurdities from the dc gossip media, this has to be among the worst
This isn't horse race politics FFS. It's potentially world war
This isn't horse race politics FFS. It's potentially world war
Reposted
It's still genocide. Doesn't matter what you call it.
January 14, 2026 at 11:55 PM
It's still genocide. Doesn't matter what you call it.
Reposted
January 14, 2026 at 7:13 PM
Reposted
Trump’s secret police are killing people in the street. People can’t afford rent or groceries. Health care is absurdly expensive.
When politicians take AIPAC money, they’re telling you whose priorities come first, and it isn’t yours.
AIPAC wants to buy this seat. We can’t let that happen.
When politicians take AIPAC money, they’re telling you whose priorities come first, and it isn’t yours.
AIPAC wants to buy this seat. We can’t let that happen.
January 14, 2026 at 5:30 PM
Trump’s secret police are killing people in the street. People can’t afford rent or groceries. Health care is absurdly expensive.
When politicians take AIPAC money, they’re telling you whose priorities come first, and it isn’t yours.
AIPAC wants to buy this seat. We can’t let that happen.
When politicians take AIPAC money, they’re telling you whose priorities come first, and it isn’t yours.
AIPAC wants to buy this seat. We can’t let that happen.
Reposted
A federal judge has barred USDA from cutting funds to help Minnesota administer its SNAP program.
January 14, 2026 at 11:42 PM
A federal judge has barred USDA from cutting funds to help Minnesota administer its SNAP program.
Reposted
i can only assume the reason for this is some israeli company would profit from it
I am introducing the Quick Recognition (QR) Act, which requires ICE and CBP officers to wear uniforms featuring QR codes. When scanned, the code would generate a digital ID displaying the officer’s name, badge number, and law enforcement agency.
ICE should be unmasked both physically and digitally.
ICE should be unmasked both physically and digitally.
January 14, 2026 at 5:45 PM
i can only assume the reason for this is some israeli company would profit from it