Agreed
Because of the conservative majority on SCOTUS and certain conservative judges, the law has very little meaning in the US anymore. They have shown it can simply be ignored to reach an outcome favorable to the MAGA/GOP cause.
The federalist society is one of the largest threats to our democracy and unfortunately, the majority of the US didn’t see that until it was way too late. They pushed these judges through the gauntlet to get them appointed and now we all reap the consequences
Unless someone put those docs in a box after Biden was sworn in as president, they can now no longer be used as evidence because it was an official act for ■■■■■, while he was still president, to put them in a box to be shipped to Mar a Lago.
Yeah, they really snuck up on everyone, because it started off as an organization for conservative law school students at a time when a majority of the student bodies of most law schools were center-left to left. But even Reagan very quickly realized the potential of that organization and gave it a huge boost. And before anyone really realized it had happened, they already had a lock on a good portion of clerkships, and, of course, on judicial appointments anytime the GOP was in control of either the White House or the Senate. A liberal version wasn’t even founded until about 20 years ago, and they still have practically zero influence on anything. That’s the American Constitution Society, if you’re interested. And yes, they need a cooler name.
I had idly wondered if there was a liberal version, but not enough to go find out. Thanks!
I don’t remember exactly when I realized how very bad the federalist society was going to be for our judiciary. They just weren’t talked about much, not even by law students or lawyers. Maybe a decade ago? But now there are 5 current or former members on SCOTUS and the federal judiciary is infested.
Now that they have some of their most extreme members everywhere and Trump has taken over the GOP, I wonder how the founders feel about gutting our legal system? Was this their actual intent or has the cart run away with the horse?
Not that they would ever admit it
It began as an end of year symposium organized by some conservative law school students at Yale and Chicago. Two of the featured speakers at that 1982 symposium were Robert Bork and Antonin Scalia. An early funder of the organization formed in the wake of that symposium was the Koch Foundation. I think what has happened since was exactly their intent.
Yeah, this is what the pearl-clutchers who fret that “political violence is unacceptable” don’t understand. The reason political violence has been unacceptable in the United States is because we ostensibly have institutions that are supposed to safeguard us against the rise of a Trump. When those institutions fail to do so through corruption, rot, and authoritarian capture, violence becomes not only inevitable but necessary as a condition for survival.
Right; that’s one of the key reasons so many despots and dictators meet violent ends. It’s not just that they make more enemies than democratic rulers do, it’s also because that’s often the only mechanism available for removing them from office.
Once you throw the concepts of “rule of law” and “peaceful transfer of power” out the window you’re putting a target on your own back as much as you are putting one on anyone else’s.
Please don’t think that they’re just driven by greed. Daddy Fred Koch was co-founder of the John Birch Society, probably KKK connected. They didn’t fall far from the Giant Hogweed.
Even after Charles joins David, they’re probably going to be a pestilence for decades.
I recently read a historian that defined a state thusly:
At the core of all of these recurrent factors is a central definition, famously stated by Max Weber, which reduces the state down effectively to a single point. The state is, “human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.”3 There are a few quirks there, of course. The monopoly is on legitimate force, not all force: every society has criminals, which is the word we use for individuals who wield illegitimate force; in a sense, the creation of the state is the process of getting a critical mass of people to reclassify all of the wielders of force save one as criminals. But crucially the definition is centered on physical force, which is to say on violence and the threat of violence, direct or remote.
She had to get rid of this case before the election, in order to really score points with the Trump administration. The Thomas opinion in the immunity case, gave her the excuse… She would have found another before November.
If Trump wins, she’ll get some offers to move up; if he loses, she’ll keep her lifetime appointment.
No risk here for her
Typo, I’m the queen of typos in large part because I use my phone.
But a little legal face eating would not go amiss. Someone needs to slap this down hard and explain what it means to be a judge.
No risk for most of the bad actors in the USA lately. Fines that are smaller than the illegal profit, hand slaps and pardons for convicted criminals, judges with zero oversight, bribery just made legal, bribable non oversighted judiciary just made the arbiters of all technical regulation questions… We are now a banana republic.