Tocqueville reader

Crazy how people went from posting black squares on instagram in 2020, to complete apathy as the country descends into fascism in 2024

Political violence is never acceptable. anyway I hope this guy gets the death penalty

TWO parades????

'Immigration doesn't bother me but it seems to bother everyone else' – Everyone.

This is what happens when the media runs away with Hard Right narratives.

Visiting left leaning France, and suddenly feeling like Yeltsin discovering American Supermarkets in 89

Ha! Yeah that’s fair, though I doubt T could ride one 10 years younger

oh come ON

Unrelated to the caption, but why does he look suddenly old and tired? He looks like Biden in his second year (a year early)

Only crime I can see in DC is a goatee with temu-Nazi art

I hope the next one doesn’t turn it back to what it was but turns it into a reflective pool

Not fleeing: New report shows more wealthy residents in Mass., 2 years into 'millionaire's tax' Despite previous concerns, Massachusetts' "millionaire's tax" hasn't seemed to deter high-earners from continuing to live here, according to a new study from the Institute for Policy Studies.

MA put in a 4% millionaires tax 2 years ago, & the GOP said we'd miss revenue targets & millionaires would flee. MA collected TWICE the projected revenues, & the number of millionaires went UP 40%.
www.wbur.org/news/2025/04...

conspiratorial thinking is all about being the smartest person in the room, seeing through the lies, refusing to be fooled

buying Ghislaine at face value is for rubes, make it abundantly clear

It’s Abu Ghraib all over again.

But inside our borders.

I trust Seth’s takes on asymmetric threats, nothing above that

Trump directs AG Pam Bondi to release Epstein case grand jury transcripts Trump said he made the decision based "on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein."

BREAKING: Trump directs AG to release Epstein case grand jury transcripts

Just going to leave this right here.

God is dead and it shows

Elon Musk's controversial Grok AI lands contract with Pentagon The Department of Defense is set to begin using Musk's controversial chatbot Grok, according to a Monday announcement.

Just a week ago, Grok spewed racist, Nazi rhetoric across this platform.

Yesterday, it won a $200M contract from Trump's DOD.

Show me your budget, and I'll show you what you value.
www.newsweek.com/elon-musks-c...

I’ll start believing it when I see the line going below 37%

The Biden administration had this case for four years and used what was in it to prosecute Maxwell. If they felt confident they had enough to prosecute other people, they would have. But they didn't.

But there could be stuff that looks bad, even if it's not prosecutable.

Remember when hurricane Katrina moved the needle? As crazy as he sounds this will still change nothing in the current balance like everything else. And that’s gonna be like that for the next +3 years

When NPR left Twitter, traffic dropped by only a single percentage point.

niemanreports.org/npr-twitter-...

Epstein case is deflected. SCOTUS says yes to unconstitutional layoffs. Nazi AI on Twitter.

All of this on thee taco tuesday?

He’s gonna have a hard time launching his own party if his robot is acting like a trump supporter

I still have people telling me that they don’t want to join Bluesky because it’s a bubble but hey they have racist AI and we don’t

Lots of chatter in the public health community already that the data from the CDC has been unreliable

As set forth in the attached Report, the Government of El Salvador responded to the UN inquiry opened by the four families asking about the disappearance of their family members: 1 The attached exhibit has redacted personal identifying information for the four men discussed in the WGEID report. Petitioners can file an unredacted version of the exhibit under seal at the Court's request, with the exception of one of the cases for particular privacy reasons related to that individual. 1 Case 1:25-cv-00766-JEB Document 160 Filed 07/07/25 Page 2 of 4 The Salvadoran State emphatically states that its authorities have not arrested, detained, or transferred the persons referred to in the communications of the Working Group. The actions of the State of El Salvador have been limited to the implementation of a bilateral cooperation mechanism with another State, through which it has facilitated the use of the Salvadoran prison infrastructure for the custody of persons detained within the scope of the justice system and law enforcement of that other State. In this context, the jurisdiction and legal responsibility for these persons lie exclusively with the competent foreign authorities, by virtue of international agreements signed and in accordance with the principles of sovereignty and international cooperation in criminal matters. In this regard, the actions attributable to the Salvadoran State are limited to its sovereignty and territorial jurisdiction, and therefore it cannot be held responsible for the failure to observe the principle of non-refoulement with respect to the persons mentioned. Ex. 1 at 6, 9 (emphasis added).

BREAKING: Documents filed in court today assert that officials from El Salvador told the United Nations that it "facilitated the use of the Salvadoran prison infrastructure" by the U.S. but that "the jurisdiction and legal responsibility for these persons lie exclusively with the" U.S.

There is a gap in the constitution of the United States where the rule of law used to be. That there is a gap has been set out by the majority of the US Supreme Court in the recent judgment of Trump v Casa, where it was held that US federal district courts are not able to issue universal injunctions that apply more widely than to just the parties to the case before the court.

In the majority opinion, Justice Amy Coney Barrett stated that the judiciary does not have “unbridled authority” to ensure that the executive follows the law. Her view is that the executive can do unlawful things that the courts cannot then do anything to prevent. This is because, she says, there is no universal jurisdiction where the courts can issue orders to ensure that the federal government complies with the constitution or federal law generally. The reason for this gap, Justice Barrett and the majority insist, is that the federal courts themselves only have powers allocated to them by the constitution and federal law. A court cannot thereby act outside of the powers provided by the empowering law. If a federal court purports to do so even when faced by government illegality, then the court is acting unlawfully. As Justice Barrett puts it, “When a court concludes that the Executive Branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power, too.” This means that even where the federal government has acted unlawfully, there are now situations where a court can do nothing about it. This statement is not some liberal or progressive take or caricature. This is the considered, open position of the US Supreme Court. Just as last year the same court decided to widen presidential immunity from prosecution, it has now held that there are other ways in which the law cannot bind the federal government. This is a subtle, almost artful move by the Supreme Court justices. While many onlookers were worried about the federal government ignoring court orders, the highest court has arranged it so that many of the most irksome court orders for the government cannot be made in the first place.

NEW

How a recent US Supreme Court judgment is an immense blow to the Rule of Law - even more than the presidential immunity decision.

Longer piece than usual.

On the universal injunctions case, by me at @prospectmagazine.co.uk

www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/ideas/law/th...

Democrats really have to stop defending the billionaire class. It’s not a love love relationship

Every. Single. Time.