@redtail896.bsky.social
"Taken on its face, such a statement seems to suggest a fear of too much justice." McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 US 279, 339 (1987) (Brennan, J. dissenting)
Reposted
The VP of the US can give a speech saying no one has to be ashamed to be white anymore — the type of mainstream political speech we haven’t seen since before the civil rights acts, and the rhetoric is treated as merely divisive with few pointing out the obvious truth that white men remain in power.
December 22, 2025 at 5:10 PM
The VP of the US can give a speech saying no one has to be ashamed to be white anymore — the type of mainstream political speech we haven’t seen since before the civil rights acts, and the rhetoric is treated as merely divisive with few pointing out the obvious truth that white men remain in power.
Reposted
This gets to a more fundamental problem: the justices are unwilling to confront what's actually happening. Trump is attempting to create an internal federal police force to use on Democratic-led cities and whose only oversight is Whiskey Pete and Republican governors.
IOW, Alito says it's weird that the majority would expect POTUS to call on the military before he can call on the NG.
But in times of invasion and rebellion WE WOULD EXPECT THE MILITARY TO BE CALLED UP FIRST. Why should the third statutory condition "unable to execute laws" be different?
But in times of invasion and rebellion WE WOULD EXPECT THE MILITARY TO BE CALLED UP FIRST. Why should the third statutory condition "unable to execute laws" be different?
December 23, 2025 at 9:25 PM
This gets to a more fundamental problem: the justices are unwilling to confront what's actually happening. Trump is attempting to create an internal federal police force to use on Democratic-led cities and whose only oversight is Whiskey Pete and Republican governors.