NJMH

They really do want a dictator. This is crazy. Do they not see how much credibility they are losing? Im 55 and I always respected the court. No more. Partisan hacks.

Also, the HHS Secretary sold cocaine in college and was a heroin addict for 14 years so it is RICH whenever they go after people for old drug offenses.

TRUMP: You have to bring in talent

INGRAHAM: Well, we have plenty of talented people in America


TRUMP: No you don't. No.


INGRAHAM: We don't have talented people here?

Why isn’t this all over the internet?

This really hasn’t gotten enough attention this week.

@wired.com #ICE
www.wired.com/story/fbi-wa...

Too bad I'm in Ca-40, stuck with Young Kim. :(

Instead of asking the Speaker of the House if he has a view on <critical separation-of-powers QOTD>, maybe reporters should start asking him if he reads any newspapers or otherwise informs himself on those matters to which we might think the Speaker of the House ought to be paying attention?

Seems like a good time for the Speaker of the House to swear in Rep. Grijalva.

Really looking forward to the Speaker of the House claiming to be unaware of the election results.

“The Government sometimes makes brief investigative stops. . . . If the officers learn that the individual they stopped is a U. S. citizen or otherwise lawfully in the United States, they promptly let the individual go.”

Justice Kavanaugh in Vasquez Perdomo:

www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...

And force to have and raise
Children

AND THEN GAVE ARGENTINA $40 BILLION!!!

Politico received an initial tip that a Taylor staffer had a swastika neatly pinned to his cubicle during a zoom call. When confronted, the congressman’s press office pretty implausibly sought to present the situation as a police matter, and Politico went along with that in its headline and lede.

Yeah, that is a tear gas canister being fired toward the retreating couple holding the baby

In her judicial opinions engaging originalism, Justice Barrett has thoughtfully raised key questions about the challenges of implementing the methodology.

In her non-judicial appearance on Fox yesterday, Barrett was decidedly less thoughtful when defending the Court's shadow docket behavior.

This is NOT making Chicago safer. And this must NOT be what America is.👇

A WILD ONE: A man broke his leg during an arrest by ICE at a car wash south of L.A.

ICE has held him under 24/7 guard at a hospital, registering him under a pseudonym, for *37 days* without telling him why.

A judge has ordered his immediate release.

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

I do want to go back to putting this case in the broader context because I think it's important to understand how we got here. Historically, the whole way that the tort liability regime worked for government misconduct was that this Court and state courts

looked to existing common law causes of action and focused on immunity defenses as the way of calibrating the harm that citizens and others faced when injured by government officers against the need to protect officers acting in good faith, back to Judge Hand in Gregoire versus Biddle. The Court struck this balance by fashioning immunity defenses where the fight would be over whether the officer was entitled to immunity or not. And for law enforcement officers specifically, this Court has long rejected the argument that there should be any context in which law enforcement officers, because of the frequency with which they interact with average individuals, because of the nature of their interactions, because of the powers they have to search, to seize, to arrest in this context, to use lethal force, did not justify absolute immunity and instead justified a more narrower, qualified kind of immunity for those most likely to come face-to-face with private citizens. Distilled to its simplest, the government's position in this case is that

officers in what is self-described as the nation's largest law enforcement agency should have a functional absolute immunity at least where foreign nationals are concerned. And our submission is that that is not consistent with how this Court has always understood the relationship between causes of action and immunity defenses in this context. It is not required by any of this Court's Bivens decisions. It does not abide by this Court's suggestion in Abbasi that there are strong reasons and powerful reasons to retain Bivens in this context. And it would eliminate the one deterrence that is meaningfully available to ensure that officers in the nation's largest law enforcement agency are complying with the law.

It's worth asking how differently things might look on the ground right now if #SCOTUS hadn't eviscerated Bivens—and made it all-but impossible to bring damages suits against federal officers (like ICE agents) who violate our constitutional rights.

This is from my rebuttal in Hernández v. Mesa:

How the Supreme Court is fast-tracking Trump’s cases on its ‘shadow docket’ | CNN Politics As President Trump continues to test precedents, the Supreme Court is seeing a high number of “shadow docket” cases. Here’s why that’s so controversial.

Here’s a really helpful @cnn.com video explaining what’s actually happening with emergency applications at #SCOTUS, and why they’ve become so controversial (with a cameo from me):

www.cnn.com/2025/10/02/p...

THIS right here

If you are arguing we aren't fully there yet & can still fight it. I agree. I do think some of us with little money, might not feel like we should post everything we are thinking because we can't leave if it becomes that. Really horrible you are getting threats for choosing to stay & fight

Just a reminder that the Commander-in-Chief of the Louisiana National Guard, who can call them out all by himself if they were actually needed, is … Governor Landry.

Well, has he?! 👇

How is it not impeachable when they clearly disregard the constitution? Dems really need to start speaking up how they will hold scotus accountable. Maybe that’s through getting rid of shadow docket, forcing written opinions or some other thing people with better minds can think of.

Crazy how Biden had no foriegn power deference. They were just snarky and rude. Is this difference of treatment not impeachable?

Just a reminder that in the Los Angeles ICE case, Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence played up the extent to which those *not* properly subject to immigration arrest were detained "briefly" and released "promptly."

www.stevevladeck.com/p/bonus-177-...

That wasn't true in L.A., and it isn't true here.

Donald Trump’s and Pam Bondi’s corruption of the Rule of Law in America will continue apace until the American People stand up and cry out “No More. We’ve had enough. We are a nation of laws, not of men.”

"Harvard can't use race as a factor in admissions, but ICE can use race as a factor in detentions" is a retrenchment essentially to a pre-Civil War understanding of the Constitution. It's vanishingly few steps removed from "Latinos have no rights which the white man is bound to respect."

National Guard documents show public ‘fear,’ veterans’ ‘shame’ over D.C. presence Internal documents reviewed by The Post reveal, with rare candor, how domestic missions rooted in politics risk damaging Americans’ trust in the military.

NEW: The National Guard analyzed its mission and found it is perceived as "leveraging fear, driving a wedge between civilians and the military, and promoting a sense of shame among troops and the military." www.washingtonpost.com/national-sec...