A great machine!

Yep, there was explicit debate about this at the time (pardoning co-conspirators) and they accepted the risk. But they might not have miscalculated. We relevantly deviated with the 17th Amendment and Citizens United. Impeachment is much more likely without those. And more reps in the House.

I haven’t followed this closely but, charitably, I originally credited the Corps for tipping people off. I’m not sure they can really prevent ICE creeping around outside?

The key component I focus on is using this case to explore the lack of legal remedies for police misconduct, encouraging Foreman to resort to extralegal remedies.

Dark Comedy: Proportionality and the Bizarre Case of Joseph “Afroman” Foreman There is no way to adequately prepare someone who is not already familiar with the details of this case.

I wrote short piece on the bizarre Joseph "Afroman" Foreman case. The salacious details of the case draw people in, but getting past those we can use the case to explore, and convey to the public/students, some of the more serious constitutional questions from this saga. substack.com/home/post/p-...

I wish I had time to write it myself, but look into incorporating the Confederate Constitution. I see lots of parallels there. I redline the Confed. Const. here, making their changes jump out:

cap-press.com/books/isbn/9...

Real post from a trucker in rural Oklahoma. It’s a cult.

Gorsuch sounds like he’s ready to use it to show the absurdity of the SG’s position. So his expertise in one area significantly helps here. It will provide support for other justices as well.

I (and you) called this over a year ago, and I got caught in some Bluesky harassment tornado (I think from people who were afraid but don’t watch the Court closely):

bsky.app/profile/samm...

bsky.app/profile/samm...

I was just about to post, Alito feeding Trump his tweets for later today. “Lunatics want Iranian terrorists we’re at war with to automatically be citizens!”

Zero interruptions to her response to JR’s question (like 3-4 mins!). Zero in response to EK’s. They let her completely finish. I’ve never seen that in such a big case, you expect to get interrupted. Devastating sign for Sauer/ Trump.

He’s apparently in the public area! At least when Biden was there for Jackson’s investiture, he sat on the right in the public area (based on easy secure exits). bsky.app/profile/smma...

I’ve heard her at a lot of oral args (in person and live audio) and I agree. I suspect that based on where she sits (left) and where friends of the justices sit (right), Trump has direct eye line.

bsky.app/profile/samm...

Mine did on YouTube recast but court website is clear.

Depending on how devastatingly his args are rejected, I would fear for him going forward what I call the Aileen Cannon Canon of interpretation. If Judge Cannon agrees with you, you are almost certainly wrong.

BK apparently looking to apply strict textualism here. Which means the SG loses on many fronts.

Roberts majority, long concurrence from NG (and others of course).

bsky.app/profile/samm...

Kagan calling out SG for what I keep hearing: “Control-F” history (looking for random references to “domicile”).

Roberts talking about birth tourism and Alito talking about humanitarian impact. Strayed a bit from originalism now!

SG’s only response to Jackson was “just see Wurmon.” That view gets 2 votes max. Shaping up to 7-2.

And that was just “working within the SG’s domicile theory.” That suggests to me he has much more powerful ammunition.

It’s hilarious.

The guy has a book on originalism coming out…

The “Trump is right/might be right” framing insinuates that he cares, at all, about the history, tradition, or original public meaning.
More accurate framing: “modern racist arg happens to align with some older racist args.”

I was a relatively early Tesla investor who has followed him for years, it is sad to see people just learning in the past year that he is very confused, and lies with shocking ease. You learn quickly as an investor to look elsewhere for facts/truth.

We obsess over what SCOTUS is doing, but state constitutions are often much broader avenues for relief.