Eric R

Off topic, but do you think Parler will be back? And were those the “good old days”? Or (probably more likely) were they the bad old days and now we’re living through the far worse sequel?

Thank you- I appreciate the kind words.

how can the majority then say that it is perfectly lawful for those same people to suffer the very irreparable harm caused by the law or order that, based on the preliminary injunction standard of review, they are likely to find unconstitutional?

not just the litigants. Does the Court say such a finding should then only benefit the litigants because only they are entitled to complete relief? Of course not (at least I pray not). So, if a law or order adjudicated unconstitutional benefits everyone similarly situated, not just the litigants,...

prevail and the subject law or executive order is found unconstitutional, the import would be nationwide, benefiting everyone, not just the litigants. How can the majority not see the illogic of their position? Everyone similarly situated benefits from a law or order declared unconstitutional,...

I am stunned reading through the birthright/nationwide injunction ruling. I agree wholeheartedly with the dissents. But I would go even further. The majority claims that injunctions should be, for the most part, fashioned to only provide complete relief to the litigants. Yet, if the litigants...

two knights are standing in the woods and one of them is saying i 've had worse . ALT: two knights are standing in the woods and one of them is saying i 've had worse .

Lol!

I think our founders would be very disappointed. Social media had the promise of being the great marketplace of ideas. Instead, it’s just a place where like-minded people can find their echo chamber of choice, entrench, and talk at everyone else.

They have to know that this just emboldens Hamas. I can just imagine their leadership (living and dead) thinking that if they can just endure, the world will force Israel to capitulate, leaving them in power. The West has yet to realize that for Hamas, Houthis etc., simply enduring = victory.

Alex, for the record, I’m with you. I’d also rather try and convince centrists to vote Dem (I’m an independent but have voted Dem for decades). But I fear Dems will run the numbers and cynically go with the far left, thinking it less risky.

I hope I’m wrong, but imo, either the Dems accommodate the far left and risk the middle and many Jews (for us, the issue is existential), or the Dems sacrifice the far left and move the platform to the right, hoping to sway those that aren’t part of the MAGA cult. Risk v sacrifice. Hmmm.

I don’t think it’s a matter of cookies. For the far left, it’s the whole box. All or nothing (or even worse than nothing). When perfect is the enemy of the good, there isn’t a whole lot of room for compromise.

Interestingly, I’m finding my feed here much less toxic than on Threads. I guess it just needs a bit more time to devolve.

Have you watched the videos they post on Telegram? They don't wear uniforms. With weapons caches stashed all throughout Gaza and accessible via their tunnel system, they can pop up anywhere, attack, drop their weapons, and *poof*- they're civilians again.

Israel offered to allow them to go into exile. They refused.

They won’t surrender because they think they can hold out until the pressure exerted by Western antizionists breaks Israel’s gov’t & forces an end to the war with them remaining in power. And the Western useful idiots play right into it.

To be clear, I’d love to be wrong.

Glad to hear it!

I think they would genuinely be upset if the war ended with Hamas releasing the hostages AND* surrendering.

* The ‘Free Palestine’ crowd almost always memory holes the surrender requirement.

Sounds amazing! One of these days, I think my stomach is going to lead me to your doorstep 😜

I'm ashamed by Trump's attempted Chamberlaining of Ukraine. Now is Europe's moment to defend Democracy. I don't say this lightly- a strong, assertive Europe diminishes our relative power, likely permanently. By electing Trump, we've proven we can't be relied upon, economically or militarily.

*protecting

Yeah. I worry that our structure and institutions will not be up to the task of protesting against demagoguery.

My concern is that SCOTUS is going to avoid actually confronting the administration. They may use strong-sounding language that purports to preserve their ability to act as a check on the Executive Branch, but they won't actually do so.

It's more like they believed the structure of our Republic they devised, between federalism (state and federal political systems) and separation of powers (different branches acting as checks/balances) would minimize the effect should a demagogue(s) be elected.

There is both civil and criminal contempt, but you’re right- civil contempt cannot be pardoned away.

I think this will happen anyway as a natural consequence of the chaos Trump is causing regardless of whether the public organizes boycotts etc. But I also think that the damage he is causing is not be easily (or may even be able to be) reversed.

I disagree. Our founders were very concerned about the possibility of voting demagogues into office. Democracies historically had a penchant for devolving into tyranny. Federalist 10 discussed this concern. Our founders designed our republican structure to minimize this risk.

Yes, he can't pardon state offenses, but I don't see that happening to a sitting president.

Tbh, I have never been an alarmist- until this administration. I don't see any effective guardrails on this administration.

Trump’s Achilles heel is the economy. Civil discontent will only get worse once we start really feeling the impact of the tariffs. This will further spook the markets and then he’ll get pressure from all sides. I think then we’ll see a big political shift in the midterms.