Quinta Jurecic

Quinta Jurecic

@qjurecic.bsky.social

3016

Posts

I write about law, democracy, and the internet. I'm a senior editor at Lawfare, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, and a contributing writer at The Atlantic and the Washington Post's Book World. It's KWIN-ta.

Posts Replies Media

fwiw I yelled so loudly about this opinion while recording a podcast the other day that my coworkers heard me from across the office

Extremely frustrating to hear legal experts analyzing the SCOTUS ruling on immunity like just another case - it's an inherently normalizing act. People need to stop playing constitutional Calvinball and treat them like political actors.

Reposted by

I wrote about the election and the American project. www.ositanwanevu.com/will-america...

it's time for my favorite ever law review student note: harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-13...

watching british election returns the question struck me: what would democrats do with a landslide? what’s the wish list? beyond saving democracy of course.

Reposted by

*did not know democracies could do that*

SAO PAULO (AP) — Brazil's federal police indict ex-President Bolsonaro for money laundering and criminal association, source confirms.

Reposted by

Not that anyone is asking me, but I have no idea what the Democrats should do right now. All the options seem bad, and there isn’t one that seems less bad than the others. And as a professional opinion-haver, it’s disorienting to have no strong opinion about something so enormously consequential.

Reposted by

imagine if billionaires had to take 300 supreme court justices fishing every time they wanted something; what a nightmare scenario

Reposted by

just watched 74 people speaking at least a dozen different languages become american citizens in a ceremony at monticello, where the speakers were themselves children of immigrants. inspiring stuff and a vivid illustration of what reactionaries want to snuff out

"John Roberts [is] abandoning his imperfect efforts to put the institution ahead of any ideological or political agenda"

Bonus 88: Chief Justice Roberts Turns Rightwww.stevevladeck.com The Trump immunity ruling was a fitting capstone to a term defined by the Chief Justice's sharp turn away from institutional moderation—a shift that could potentially have cataclysmic effects.

Reposted by

crises come in different flavors but they do keep coming

totally fine for 3 yrs, then suddenly started getting leggy and drying up. it has a pebble tray and a humidifier and I water it with the little watering globes using tap water that's sat out for 24 hrs to let chlorine etc evaporate. do I need to start using distilled water on this stupid thing

on top of everything else my calathea is dying >:[

on top of everything else my calathea is dying >:[

re: posts about "why is the press focusing on biden's age when it didn't focus on how trump was asleep at his trial"

I'm going to regret this but as someone who was in court for 2 days watching trump's ny trial, he definitely was not asleep the whole time. idk if he was asleep at other times when I wasn't there, but mostly it just seemed like he was sitting leaning back w eyes closed as a weirdo power move

I'm going to regret this but as someone who was in court for 2 days watching trump's ny trial, he definitely was not asleep the whole time. idk if he was asleep at other times when I wasn't there, but mostly it just seemed like he was sitting leaning back w eyes closed as a weirdo power move

Incredibly, if you make this argument today you will still be accused of overreacting

"viewing Trump as something like a fascist leader foresaw the violence of January 6th as a live possibility, while its critics mocked the notion as mere hysteria. Whatever its shortcomings, “Trump as fascist” remains the best guide to what Trump will try to do next"

What's In a Wordwww.unpopularfront.news A Canned Post

Reposted by

"viewing Trump as something like a fascist leader foresaw the violence of January 6th as a live possibility, while its critics mocked the notion as mere hysteria. Whatever its shortcomings, “Trump as fascist” remains the best guide to what Trump will try to do next"

What's In a Wordwww.unpopularfront.news A Canned Post

Reposted by

It’s demoralizing & demobilizing to speculate about extreme scenarios, even if they are plausible in a long enough timeline. Focus instead on what you can do to prevent them: building coalitions (including with those who you disagree with on other issues) & acting in solidarity

Reposted by

Stuff takes time. Pick your example—Hungary, Turkey, Russia, wherever—they are all quite distinct and didn’t get that way in a vacuum or overnight. Focus on the next thing rather than the hypothetical drawn from a different context.

Reposted by

I think it is wise and productive for people to take seriously the idea we are in a constitutional crisis in America. I don’t think it is wise or productive to assume what happens next is like what happens in semi consolidated or consolidated authoritarian systems.

Reposted by

The best argument against Biden resigning.

1/ I'm agnostic as to whether Biden should withdraw from the race. It's a genuinely tough question IMO. But I have clarity on one thing: He should absolutely not step down as president. If Harris becomes President, the Vice Presidency is empty. Under the 25th Amendment ...

Foreign affairs power, commander in chief power, absolutely or presumptively immune

Could the government of Cuba offer to wire a billion dollars to the personal bank account of a president if he orders the Navy to withdraw from Guantanamo Bay?

it says a great deal that roberts has time in his majority opinion to mock the dissents for their "tone of chilling doom" but can't actually manage to rebut this hypo. because he can't

also, the order to have the rival killed is itself an official act (directing the military, commander in chief power) so you can't introduce evidence of that even if you could somehow find a way to prosecute the assassination

also, the order to have the rival killed is itself an official act (directing the military, commander in chief power) so you can't introduce evidence of that even if you could somehow find a way to prosecute the assassination

how do you rebut presumption of immunity? nobody knows. but you can't consider the president's motive in rebutting it or the fact that murder is against the law. doesn't matter if president says to his advisors "I would like to kill rival because I hate them." inadmissible

how do you rebut presumption of immunity? nobody knows. but you can't consider the president's motive in rebutting it or the fact that murder is against the law. doesn't matter if president says to his advisors "I would like to kill rival because I hate them." inadmissible

let's do the seal team six hypo. president orders st6 to assassinate a political rival bc rival is a threat to national security. possible this is absolutely immune under pres's commander in chief power. if it's not, then it gets presumptive immunity (which may be absolute anyway)

let's do the seal team six hypo. president orders st6 to assassinate a political rival bc rival is a threat to national security. possible this is absolutely immune under pres's commander in chief power. if it's not, then it gets presumptive immunity (which may be absolute anyway)

if your instinct is "calm down, surely this is an exaggeration," allow me to assure you that it's really not

Reposted by

Some Robert Cover to consider in light of some recent decisions

if your instinct is "calm down, surely this is an exaggeration," allow me to assure you that it's really not

"Don't worry, if the president imprisons his political enemies, you can still get a writ of habeas corpus." "But to prove that's why you've been imprisoned requires proof of..." "Presidential motive!" "And under Trump v US, presidential motive is..." "Inadmissible!"

Reposted by

"Don't worry, if the president imprisons his political enemies, you can still get a writ of habeas corpus." "But to prove that's why you've been imprisoned requires proof of..." "Presidential motive!" "And under Trump v US, presidential motive is..." "Inadmissible!"

Reposted by

Heritage Foundation president celebrates Supreme Court presidential immunity ruling: "We are in the process of the second American Revolution, which will remain bloodless if the left allows it to be" www.mediamatters.org/project-2025...

Heritage Foundation president celebrates Supreme Court immunity decision: "We are in the process of the second American Revolution"www.mediamatters.org

Reposted by

The more you read yesterday’s immunity decision, the more appalling it gets. My take: www.nytimes.com/2024/07/02/o...

Opinion | The Supreme Court Creates a Lawless Presidencywww.nytimes.com It is increasingly clear that this court sees itself as something other than a participant in our democratic system.

Reposted by

The Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. United States would have been wrong and dangerous at any time. It’s uncommonly so with Trump poised to retake power, write @qjurecic.bsky.social and Benjamin Wittes. www.lawfaremedia.org/article/a-de...

A Decision of Surpassing Recklessness in Dangerous Timeswww.lawfaremedia.org The Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. United States would have been wrong and dangerous at any time. It’s uncommonly so with Trump poised to retake power.