that the whole project is at serious and maybe fatal risk if trump is imprisoned or loses in the fall and that conservatives on the court have a duty to try to prevent that any way they can, through the most motivated reasoning they can conjure.
I think this is true *and yet* this is not the most careful decision of its type he could have crafted to look reasonable! I’d guess it’s the most careful one he could craft without the other five ditching him and going way further.
I mean it really feels like they have gotten even sloppier- the nonsense of the students loans case ignoring the plain text of the law, Bruen being so badly reasoned they had to revisit it less than six months later, and now this which seems like it goes nowhere anyone wants it to go except the 6.
the whole term has been, even to a layidiot like me, one sloppy, eye-rolling clusterfuck after another, which isn't sustainable. though, unsustainability doesn't mean "good"
The whole invention of “history and tradition” to justify their bullshit decisions has been *exceedingly* sloppy and shown more than ever that they only care about results and the rest is barely even a fig leaf.
I mean I am not kidding when I say that there are a lot of lawyers out there who likely have having a bit of an identity crisis right now because the activist liberal viewpoint of “the law is brute power built off of counting votes weakly constrained by norms” has been proven unambiguously true
One summer I stayed with a handful of friends in our frat house at college. We had a system where we would rotate who made dinner for everyone, and we all went ~once a week. We got one skip day over the course of the summer where we could just order pizza instead. Anyway…
…the next summer we did the same, but at some point we realized the rules were arbitrary and we could just order pizza every night, and that’s what we did for the rest of the summer. The Supreme Court feels like that, to me.
