volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@kegill That's true, but, it misses the point.

The other side is arguing that the guy is not at all being arrested for peaceful protesting. They would agree with you, and say he can protest peacefully all day, but that's not what they say he did.

So to point out that peaceful protest is protected speaks past the charges against the guy, which according to them have absolutely nothing to do with peaceful protesting.

So no, according to their argument, it is completely wrong that they can arrest anybody. That's a straw man argument compared to what the other side is actually charging.

@PekkaKallioniemi Well it's Trump versus sanity.

The back and forth is whether Trump is thoughtlessly reacting versus letting more mature, more rational people set policy.

There's nothing surprising here. When Trump insists on driving he starts swerving left and right, and then sometimes he lets other people in the administration drive, and they actually steady the course. But they have to talk him into it, pander to him, convince Grandpa to give up the keys as the Republicans kept saying when it came to Biden.

I'm convinced that the people surrounding Trump aren't really on his side. They know he's awful, some are trying to protect the country from him, and some are just after personal ambition. But this framing completely explains whatever's happening.

@lillyfinch What in the world?

The court very often rules against heritage foundation positions, and the heritage foundation for its part often rails against what the court does.

In the real world, no, there is no love lost between those two institutions.

@TCatInReality No you have that completely backwards.

Roberts wasn't hostile to the VRA, he was a supporter of the law! That actually buttressed the VRA.

A lot of people really don't understand that when laws are faithfully respected in the courts that makes them more, not less, powerful.

Roberts didn't lie. And it has absolutely nothing to do with DEI, which was a really nutty leap for the linked article to make.

Yes, times change. Doesn't mean they have changed completely, but when Roberts pointed out that it was important to set aside the loopholes and faithfully apply the law in light of the changed circumstances, that was an extremely rational position to take.

And it's why he was able to gain the support of the other justices. This sort of sensational article talks as if he's acting unilaterally, but that's not how the world works.

@JaniceOCG @AngryBlackLady

@lillyfinch this overlooks that the justices aren't so much talking about conservative versus liberal versus moderate in so many of these cases, but simply discussions about proper procedure.

Neither the world, nor the Supreme Court, are so black and white.

@SaanichGuy keep in mind that Americans are generally not concerned about Alito's performance on the bench, and not particularly interested in his personal life.

If elsewhere this would mean resignation, well, now THAT would be corruption of the system, with personal attacks overriding the role the person serves in our government.

The US might be better than elsewhere when it comes to things like this.

Also, US tax policy promotes charging for checked bags. But we keep reelecting the same people promoting those policies, so again, we get what we vote for.

Yay democracy!

@kims

@kegill the answer is simple: because it's simply not an option on the table to return to the previous borders.

There has been no workable plan for forcing Russia to return to the other boarders. That milk has been spilt.

That's why the victim needs to hand over territory, at least for now. Because there is no realistic alternative on the table.

@kegill this misses that the argument is precisely that the activity WASN'T constitutionally protected.

There are other issues with the legal process here, but that framing gets the situation wrong.

@Free_Press I'd say it goes the other way from the picture.

We ALREADY HAD a circus, so we elected a clown.

The cause and effect are the other way around, and this is backed by the public levels of dissatisfaction with how government had been operating.

@petersuber there's so much question begging there, though.

For example, installing "ideologically aligned" people can be PRO-science if you don't start with the assumption that they're anti-

And so, so many say it's in promotion of science that we need to break the ideological bonds that have been keeping these institutions bound to antiscientific patterns.

@chrischirp

@MattBinder on his radio show today Sean Hannity announced that he was going to buy some Teslas in support.

If Trump was copying Hannity here that really captures the current state of affairs where Trump is just doing whatever conservatives are talking about, just following them.

Just to emphasize it: not leading, following and taking advantage of whatever is being talked about by those morons.

@audiodude not in this political environment

@LevZadov kind of funny to say nothing like this in American history while pointing out that there was something like this in American history.

No we all need to emphasize that the solution is and has always been at the feet of Congress.

If Congress isn't doing its job, be very interested in what your particular congresspeople and probably stop reelecting them.

@lawprofblawg

Going behind the satire, one thing I find fascinating is that the new crop of conservatives have been happy to dethrone Reagan. I've never seen mainstream conservatives so willing to call him out.

@walterolson.bsky.social Musk is trolling us. He's posting things to get attention.

There's an old internet adage, don't feed the trolls.

Even wondering about what he might post is playing into his game and encouraging it to happen.

@robcinos taken?

No.

Accepted payment in return for providing services the government found really valuable and worth buying.

It's a pretty important part of the story.