favs.blue
  1. 1

    I will once again remind folks that a very sizable chunk of what looks like Congress not doing anything to push back against the president is in fact a consequence of the Court disabling/destroying all the ways Congress has tried to push back.

    3,848 868
    Jun 29, 2026
  2. 3

    Reply to @joshchafetz.bsky.social

    No legislative veto. Hampered oversight. No agencies outside of presidential control. No attempt to meaningfully enforce the power of the purse statutes. This is the Court’s doing.

    1,455 241
    Jun 29, 2026
  3. 4

    What kind of fascist hellscape is happing on Pennsylvania Ave at the Eastern Market Metro stop? These guys—seemingly all white, all men—have their faces covered, are carrying shields, wearing brown …

    769 227
    Jul 4, 2026
  4. 5

    NYC currently has a shark problem
    DC currently has a jets problem

    there's only one solution

    832 162
    Jul 2, 2026
  5. 6

    Anthropic is accusing other companies of--get this--unfairly copying their work. www.nytimes.com/2026/07/06/t...

    633 133
    Jul 6, 2026
  6. 7

    1/ I know we've all moved on to Barbara etc., but one observation about Slaughter.

    In his conclusion, Roberts writes: "Th[e] President is not all powerful—not by any means." He then cites three cases: Milligan, Youngstown, and the Nixon Tapes Case.

    493 111
    Jul 1, 2026
  7. 8

    The discourse around the Supreme Court term would be much improved, I think, if people focused on the center of the Court as being very much part of the GOP coalition, rather than focusing entirely on whether it is or is not doing Trump’s bidding specifically.

    561 93
    Jul 6, 2026
  8. 11

    Reply to @joshchafetz.bsky.social

    3/ What is the implication? Just that--consistent with the literature on judicial self-aggrandizement--Roberts understands whatever (minimal) constraints on the presidency there are to be those imposed by the Court alone.

    332 59
    Jul 1, 2026
  9. 13

    Reply to @joshchafetz.bsky.social

    4/4 Congress is figured as a branch that needs to *be constrained*, but it is not a branch that can legitimately constrain the presidency.

    This is not new--as I've repeatedly argued, it is very characteristic of how this Court sees Congress--but it is worth noting.

    373 54
    Jul 1, 2026
  10. 14

    TBH, I think Steve is giving the Court too much credit here. It's not at all clear to me that they've shown up with a fire extinguisher as opposed to, say, a bag of marshmallows and some hot dogs.

    346 49
    Jul 1, 2026
  11. 15

    Once again, McConnell being absent from the Senate without resigning is *better for Democrats* than the alternatives.

    Again, one way you know this is that Senate Democrats are not up in arms about what's going on here.

    301 49
    Jul 22, 2026
  12. 16

    Yes, and also I hate the headline the piece has on here (which is different than the headline if you click through).

    It’s a bad sign for all knowledge production. This fetishization of “science” is ultimately itself destructive of the academy and broader society.

    145 41
    Jul 6, 2026
  13. 17

    1/2 I've posted a revised version of my paper on unitary executive theory and democratic accountability, now with a discussion of Slaughter and Cook at pp. 5-6. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

    160 39
    Jul 1, 2026
  14. 18

    Reply to @joshchafetz.bsky.social

    2/ Each of those involve the *Court* imposing limits on the president in the name of the Constitution. None of them involve Congress constraining the presidency.

    Indeed, Roberts approvingly cites Chadha in several places.

    334 39
    Jul 1, 2026
  15. 20

    Man, the author of the majority opinion in Slaughter is gonna be SO MAD when he reads what the author of the majority opinion in Cook had to say about agency independence from presidential control.

    278 35
    Jul 1, 2026
  16. 21

    Reply to @joshchafetz.bsky.social

    2/ Under Alito's "updating," the more racist a party is, and therefore the more it drives away minority voters, the *less* likely a plaintiff is to be able to satisfy the Gingles preconditions, because it will be increasingly impossible to "control for partisan preferences" as distinct from race.

    162 34
    Jul 7, 2026
  17. 22

    Really missing the artisanal feel of pre-AI email scams

    269 33
    Jul 24, 2026
  18. 25

    Reply to @joshchafetz.bsky.social

    The idea that the U.S. is launching “retaliatory strikes” for the American soldiers killed in Kuwait, when those soldiers were only killed because the U.S. launched a war of aggression in Iran is some kind of thing.

    183 28
    Jul 19, 2026