John Pfaff
@johnpfaff.bsky.social
Professor at Fordham Law. Prisons and criminal justice quant. I'm not contrarian, the data are. Author of Locked In. New stuff at johnfpfaff.com.
Reposted by John Pfaff
It's good—very good, and very important—that district courts keep issuing these 100-page rulings upholding the law. It must be incredibly dispiriting to see them overturned in a two-page, lawless, unsigned order, but please, keep them coming. They expose SCOTUS' corruption like nothing else.
December 5, 2025 at 12:41 AM
It's good—very good, and very important—that district courts keep issuing these 100-page rulings upholding the law. It must be incredibly dispiriting to see them overturned in a two-page, lawless, unsigned order, but please, keep them coming. They expose SCOTUS' corruption like nothing else.
Anyway, fingers crossed for more red districts to see 13 swings for the Dems, esp in states with large Hispanic populations.
Because you know how the TX gerrymander works, right? To make light-blue ones pink, it has to make formerly-red districts pink too.
Or, with a 13-point Dem swing? Blue.
Because you know how the TX gerrymander works, right? To make light-blue ones pink, it has to make formerly-red districts pink too.
Or, with a 13-point Dem swing? Blue.
December 5, 2025 at 3:02 AM
Anyway, fingers crossed for more red districts to see 13 swings for the Dems, esp in states with large Hispanic populations.
Because you know how the TX gerrymander works, right? To make light-blue ones pink, it has to make formerly-red districts pink too.
Or, with a 13-point Dem swing? Blue.
Because you know how the TX gerrymander works, right? To make light-blue ones pink, it has to make formerly-red districts pink too.
Or, with a 13-point Dem swing? Blue.
Every single Con Law paper from now until some distant future date should be on the history, doctrine, policy, law, etc etc and etc needed to undermine, marginalize, and in all other ways disempower this utterly lawless SCOTUS.
Nothing else matters on the topic. Literally nothing.
Nothing else matters on the topic. Literally nothing.
December 5, 2025 at 2:55 AM
Every single Con Law paper from now until some distant future date should be on the history, doctrine, policy, law, etc etc and etc needed to undermine, marginalize, and in all other ways disempower this utterly lawless SCOTUS.
Nothing else matters on the topic. Literally nothing.
Nothing else matters on the topic. Literally nothing.
I was listening to The Daily (bc someone else near me was), and they were talking abt ICE in Minneapolis, and they were saying it’ll be tougher for ICE there than in Chicago or LA bc a huge % of the Somalis there are US citizens.
And I was like, why on EARTH do you think that’ll influence ICE?
And I was like, why on EARTH do you think that’ll influence ICE?
December 5, 2025 at 2:52 AM
I was listening to The Daily (bc someone else near me was), and they were talking abt ICE in Minneapolis, and they were saying it’ll be tougher for ICE there than in Chicago or LA bc a huge % of the Somalis there are US citizens.
And I was like, why on EARTH do you think that’ll influence ICE?
And I was like, why on EARTH do you think that’ll influence ICE?
I can't imagine that 25% of GOPers think that the Jersey Shore crew is more loyal to Italy than the US.
Especially since 29% think EVANGELICALS are more loyal to ... to who? WHO? They don't even have a Vatican or a Canterbury!
So who are they thinking of when they answer these questions?
Especially since 29% think EVANGELICALS are more loyal to ... to who? WHO? They don't even have a Vatican or a Canterbury!
So who are they thinking of when they answer these questions?
losing my mind at the 25% of GOP voters who think most Italian Americans are "more loyal to a foreign country than to the United States."
December 4, 2025 at 9:40 PM
I can't imagine that 25% of GOPers think that the Jersey Shore crew is more loyal to Italy than the US.
Especially since 29% think EVANGELICALS are more loyal to ... to who? WHO? They don't even have a Vatican or a Canterbury!
So who are they thinking of when they answer these questions?
Especially since 29% think EVANGELICALS are more loyal to ... to who? WHO? They don't even have a Vatican or a Canterbury!
So who are they thinking of when they answer these questions?
NGL, I've really been struggling to think through this one lately, and I don't have any answers yet.
My default instinct is to defend unfettered pardon power against the usual "look at this one terrible choice" attacks, since those are dwarfed by meritorious cases that don't get relief.
But.
My default instinct is to defend unfettered pardon power against the usual "look at this one terrible choice" attacks, since those are dwarfed by meritorious cases that don't get relief.
But.
A lot of people do not want to hear that there is an intense pro-police and pro-prison turn among the left. E.g. the drive to limit the pardon power, which is the only way some people get any relief from excessive sentencing on the state and federal level.
www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2025/12...
www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2025/12...
What Trump gets right and wrong about pardons
Pardons aren’t about helping political allies – they’re about bringing a measure of justice to an unjust system.
www.prisonpolicy.org
December 4, 2025 at 8:26 PM
NGL, I've really been struggling to think through this one lately, and I don't have any answers yet.
My default instinct is to defend unfettered pardon power against the usual "look at this one terrible choice" attacks, since those are dwarfed by meritorious cases that don't get relief.
But.
My default instinct is to defend unfettered pardon power against the usual "look at this one terrible choice" attacks, since those are dwarfed by meritorious cases that don't get relief.
But.
Tom Cotton knows his niche, which is bloodthirsty disdain for any limitations on military violence.
A man so bloodthirsty the Times had to append a huge correction to his demands that we use the military against George Floyd protestors.
A man so bloodthirsty the Times had to append a huge correction to his demands that we use the military against George Floyd protestors.
December 4, 2025 at 8:03 PM
Tom Cotton knows his niche, which is bloodthirsty disdain for any limitations on military violence.
A man so bloodthirsty the Times had to append a huge correction to his demands that we use the military against George Floyd protestors.
A man so bloodthirsty the Times had to append a huge correction to his demands that we use the military against George Floyd protestors.
It wasn’t a fight before the FIRST strike.
Q: What did you see in the second strike?
Cotton: "I saw two survivors trying to flip a boat -- loaded with drugs, bound for the United States -- back over, so they could stay in the fight."
Cotton: "I saw two survivors trying to flip a boat -- loaded with drugs, bound for the United States -- back over, so they could stay in the fight."
December 4, 2025 at 6:15 PM
It wasn’t a fight before the FIRST strike.
This would have to be the single biggest partisan shift in democratic history that didn't involve a civil war or the equivalent, right?
Just stunning.
I suppose Whig Party in the US comes closest? But it was more a shift, and wasn't in power at its collapse. And was part of prelude to civil war.
Just stunning.
I suppose Whig Party in the US comes closest? But it was more a shift, and wasn't in power at its collapse. And was part of prelude to civil war.
📊 Seat estimate | Labour wipeout
➡️ REF: 360 (+355)
🟢 GRN: 79 (+75)
🟠 LD: 72 (-)
🔵 CON: 48 (-73)
🟡 SNP: 45 (+36)
🟢 PLAID: 7 (+3)
🔴 LAB: 4 (-407)
Based on @findoutnowUK poll, 3 Dec (+/- vs GE24)
➡️ REF: 360 (+355)
🟢 GRN: 79 (+75)
🟠 LD: 72 (-)
🔵 CON: 48 (-73)
🟡 SNP: 45 (+36)
🟢 PLAID: 7 (+3)
🔴 LAB: 4 (-407)
Based on @findoutnowUK poll, 3 Dec (+/- vs GE24)
December 4, 2025 at 5:07 PM
This would have to be the single biggest partisan shift in democratic history that didn't involve a civil war or the equivalent, right?
Just stunning.
I suppose Whig Party in the US comes closest? But it was more a shift, and wasn't in power at its collapse. And was part of prelude to civil war.
Just stunning.
I suppose Whig Party in the US comes closest? But it was more a shift, and wasn't in power at its collapse. And was part of prelude to civil war.
A few days ago, one of my middle schoolers had to do a peer assessment of a classmate’s work, and told us that night they didn’t know what to say bc there was so much off they genuinely didn’t know where to start.
I know think their teacher gave them Nuzzi’s book as a prank.
I know think their teacher gave them Nuzzi’s book as a prank.
At least 40% of the book is just tortured descriptions of her surroundings.
December 4, 2025 at 4:46 PM
A few days ago, one of my middle schoolers had to do a peer assessment of a classmate’s work, and told us that night they didn’t know what to say bc there was so much off they genuinely didn’t know where to start.
I know think their teacher gave them Nuzzi’s book as a prank.
I know think their teacher gave them Nuzzi’s book as a prank.
Hey! The one time I did this (back on the other place) was to quote my kid asking me why our prisons are full of people convicted of drug crimes, and then (not in a deep philosophical way) what is a crime anyway.
So some of us proudly can’t even clear the low bar of “parrot me back to me, sponge.”
So some of us proudly can’t even clear the low bar of “parrot me back to me, sponge.”
Relatedly, one of the most tedious things people do is go 'wow. How profound. My pre-school child, who I literally taught to speak and whose brain is a highly powerful and retentive sponge, has paraphrased my politics back at me in a cute way'. I mean, no kidding.
What exactly is the end game here? Fail at banking, fail at being a business guru, try to become fixture of right wing think tank set?
December 4, 2025 at 3:19 PM
Hey! The one time I did this (back on the other place) was to quote my kid asking me why our prisons are full of people convicted of drug crimes, and then (not in a deep philosophical way) what is a crime anyway.
So some of us proudly can’t even clear the low bar of “parrot me back to me, sponge.”
So some of us proudly can’t even clear the low bar of “parrot me back to me, sponge.”
Yeah, this is the framing. Keep hammering this point over and over and over.
Peggy Flanagan: "When you talk about safety and yet are coming into communities willy nilly -- we know the Trump administration has actually removed public safety resources from Minnesota. They're telling on themselves. This is about division, it's about stoking fear, it's about distraction."
December 4, 2025 at 3:04 PM
Yeah, this is the framing. Keep hammering this point over and over and over.
And blew up boats w random ppl!
From a “tough on crime” angle, these are non-se social choices.
From a “social control” angle, they make total sense.
I hammer this point bc of how the media keeps framing his Nat Guard nonsense as “tough on crime.”
Trump doesn’t care abt CRIME. It’s abt control.
From a “tough on crime” angle, these are non-se social choices.
From a “social control” angle, they make total sense.
I hammer this point bc of how the media keeps framing his Nat Guard nonsense as “tough on crime.”
Trump doesn’t care abt CRIME. It’s abt control.
He just pardoned a huge narcotrafficker! They’re not tough on crime.
December 4, 2025 at 3:03 PM
And blew up boats w random ppl!
From a “tough on crime” angle, these are non-se social choices.
From a “social control” angle, they make total sense.
I hammer this point bc of how the media keeps framing his Nat Guard nonsense as “tough on crime.”
Trump doesn’t care abt CRIME. It’s abt control.
From a “tough on crime” angle, these are non-se social choices.
From a “social control” angle, they make total sense.
I hammer this point bc of how the media keeps framing his Nat Guard nonsense as “tough on crime.”
Trump doesn’t care abt CRIME. It’s abt control.
A good reminder that “tough on crime” has never really been abt public safety, but abt social control.
Trump 2.0 has taken that to an extreme, burning thru decades of accrued “crime fighting” goodwill to impose a highly personalized form of that social control.
But the core motivation is the same.
Trump 2.0 has taken that to an extreme, burning thru decades of accrued “crime fighting” goodwill to impose a highly personalized form of that social control.
But the core motivation is the same.
It’s extremely funny how we no longer have any basis, whatsoever, to trust the claims and process of federal law enforcement lol
December 4, 2025 at 2:55 PM
A good reminder that “tough on crime” has never really been abt public safety, but abt social control.
Trump 2.0 has taken that to an extreme, burning thru decades of accrued “crime fighting” goodwill to impose a highly personalized form of that social control.
But the core motivation is the same.
Trump 2.0 has taken that to an extreme, burning thru decades of accrued “crime fighting” goodwill to impose a highly personalized form of that social control.
But the core motivation is the same.
It’s still amazing to me that Ezra Klein argued that in the crime context they are.
Without asking why the public is misinformed (it’s the media! which he works for!), he argued that policy had to respond only to vibes.
So, he said, we had to act like crime was rising during historic drops.
Without asking why the public is misinformed (it’s the media! which he works for!), he argued that policy had to respond only to vibes.
So, he said, we had to act like crime was rising during historic drops.
“The economy is better than many think because [well established macroeconomic metrics that aggregate the lived experience of millions using multiple methods].”
and
“The economy is better than many think because [lies].”
These are not the same.
and
“The economy is better than many think because [lies].”
These are not the same.
How weird that two presidents' and all of the commentariat's scolding about how the economy is good, actually didn't make people feel good about the bad economy.
December 4, 2025 at 2:10 PM
It’s still amazing to me that Ezra Klein argued that in the crime context they are.
Without asking why the public is misinformed (it’s the media! which he works for!), he argued that policy had to respond only to vibes.
So, he said, we had to act like crime was rising during historic drops.
Without asking why the public is misinformed (it’s the media! which he works for!), he argued that policy had to respond only to vibes.
So, he said, we had to act like crime was rising during historic drops.
Love this idea.
But instead of setting a fixed price, they should auction them off by neighborhood, like how we've sold radio spectrum in the past.
Can you imagine what the, say, north Park Slope auction price would be?! I once spent 90 mins looking for a space there at night when I lived there.
But instead of setting a fixed price, they should auction them off by neighborhood, like how we've sold radio spectrum in the past.
Can you imagine what the, say, north Park Slope auction price would be?! I once spent 90 mins looking for a space there at night when I lived there.
December 4, 2025 at 4:29 AM
Love this idea.
But instead of setting a fixed price, they should auction them off by neighborhood, like how we've sold radio spectrum in the past.
Can you imagine what the, say, north Park Slope auction price would be?! I once spent 90 mins looking for a space there at night when I lived there.
But instead of setting a fixed price, they should auction them off by neighborhood, like how we've sold radio spectrum in the past.
Can you imagine what the, say, north Park Slope auction price would be?! I once spent 90 mins looking for a space there at night when I lived there.
I feel like this may undermine the willingness of the rank and file soldiers the laws of war aim to protect from following bad orders from their would-be authoritarian civilian leaders and any spineless superiors.
Which, in this case, is NOT bad: civilian control is good… when it acts LEGALLY.
Which, in this case, is NOT bad: civilian control is good… when it acts LEGALLY.
"They were radio-ing for rescue to uh...other drug boats. In the vicinity!"
A high-ranking US naval officer is going to claim that it is OK to blow up shipwrecked combatants at sea who are sending out an SOS for rescue.
A high-ranking US naval officer is going to claim that it is OK to blow up shipwrecked combatants at sea who are sending out an SOS for rescue.
December 4, 2025 at 1:32 AM
I feel like this may undermine the willingness of the rank and file soldiers the laws of war aim to protect from following bad orders from their would-be authoritarian civilian leaders and any spineless superiors.
Which, in this case, is NOT bad: civilian control is good… when it acts LEGALLY.
Which, in this case, is NOT bad: civilian control is good… when it acts LEGALLY.
Correct me if I’m wrong, sincerely, but isn’t his defense to “you committed a war crime” just … “yes, I did, but I’d like to clarify the details of how it was committed”?
Killing someone actively running drugs in this way is a crime. “They kept going!” doesn’t change that.
Killing someone actively running drugs in this way is a crime. “They kept going!” doesn’t change that.
Survivors of Boat Strike Were Actively Continuing Drug Mission, Admiral to Tell Lawmakers www.wsj.com/politics/nat...
Exclusive | Survivors of Boat Strike Were Actively Continuing Drug Mission, Admiral to Tell Lawmakers
Adm. Frank “Mitch” Bradley, the commander of the September attack, is set to provide an account of his role for the first time in a closed briefing.
www.wsj.com
December 4, 2025 at 1:25 AM
Correct me if I’m wrong, sincerely, but isn’t his defense to “you committed a war crime” just … “yes, I did, but I’d like to clarify the details of how it was committed”?
Killing someone actively running drugs in this way is a crime. “They kept going!” doesn’t change that.
Killing someone actively running drugs in this way is a crime. “They kept going!” doesn’t change that.
Reposted by John Pfaff
Oh they didn't burn him alive in the middle of the ocean without hearing evidence against him? That's universally understood as not the appropriate punishment?
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Doctor who sold ketamine to ‘Friends’ star Matthew Perry before his overdose death gets 2 1/2 years in prison.
December 4, 2025 at 12:56 AM
Oh they didn't burn him alive in the middle of the ocean without hearing evidence against him? That's universally understood as not the appropriate punishment?
I assume they’ll fire the senior field office ppl and then replace them w loyalists who lack competence.
Not being snarky.
That’s the pattern we keep seeing. And it’s why we shouldn’t be doomery.
Trump strikes me as the only MAGA type w real political savvy (once), and he’s just … so bad at this.
Not being snarky.
That’s the pattern we keep seeing. And it’s why we shouldn’t be doomery.
Trump strikes me as the only MAGA type w real political savvy (once), and he’s just … so bad at this.
Scoop: FBI aims to escalate its inquiry into 6 Democrats who made video for troops by pressing domestic terrorism squad to launch a formal seditious conspiracy investigation. Washington Field Office leaders are pushing back b/c they don't see a crime. news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/...
FBI Seeks ‘Seditious Conspiracy’ Probe of Democratic Lawmakers
The FBI is pressuring domestic terrorism agents to open a seditious conspiracy investigation into six Democratic lawmakers who advised military service members to defy unlawful orders, according to th...
news.bloomberglaw.com
December 4, 2025 at 1:03 AM
I assume they’ll fire the senior field office ppl and then replace them w loyalists who lack competence.
Not being snarky.
That’s the pattern we keep seeing. And it’s why we shouldn’t be doomery.
Trump strikes me as the only MAGA type w real political savvy (once), and he’s just … so bad at this.
Not being snarky.
That’s the pattern we keep seeing. And it’s why we shouldn’t be doomery.
Trump strikes me as the only MAGA type w real political savvy (once), and he’s just … so bad at this.
Wait, the *I*OC changed its definitions in response to a Trump EO?
That “I” stands for “International.” I’m quite confident a Trumpian EO lacks international jurisdiction.
Surely the *I*OC could have told Trump to go to hell. Such cravenness.
That “I” stands for “International.” I’m quite confident a Trumpian EO lacks international jurisdiction.
Surely the *I*OC could have told Trump to go to hell. Such cravenness.
SCOOP: The United States Tennis Association (USTA) quietly updated its player eligibility policy to ban trans women from competing as women in their leagues, tournaments and competitions in order to comply with Trump's anti-trans sports executive order. The policy went into effect on Monday.
USTA bans trans athletes from competing as women to comply with Trump executive order
The national tennis governing body's policy change was made with no announcement.
www.thehandbasket.co
December 4, 2025 at 12:38 AM
Wait, the *I*OC changed its definitions in response to a Trump EO?
That “I” stands for “International.” I’m quite confident a Trumpian EO lacks international jurisdiction.
Surely the *I*OC could have told Trump to go to hell. Such cravenness.
That “I” stands for “International.” I’m quite confident a Trumpian EO lacks international jurisdiction.
Surely the *I*OC could have told Trump to go to hell. Such cravenness.
Reposted by John Pfaff
I hope people take two minutes to listen to this shocking display of bigotry. It brings clarity to what we are fighting against. We should all be sick to hear such un-American drivel from the President of the United States.
Trump: "It’s a hellhole right now. And those Somalians should be out of here. They've destroyed our country. And all they do is complain, complain, complain. You have her. She’s always talking about the Constitution provides me with – go back to your own country and figure out your constitution."
December 3, 2025 at 9:53 PM
I hope people take two minutes to listen to this shocking display of bigotry. It brings clarity to what we are fighting against. We should all be sick to hear such un-American drivel from the President of the United States.
Harvard deserves credit here, and I’ll admit I was wrong in assuming it would cave.
Schools like Northwestern are bending the knee even as Trump’s popularity starts defining new negative numbers, but Harvard has been his Number One target from Day One, and it’s fought back effectively.
Schools like Northwestern are bending the knee even as Trump’s popularity starts defining new negative numbers, but Harvard has been his Number One target from Day One, and it’s fought back effectively.
Via a friend, the only time I can remember a President of Harvard as subject/hero of an editorial page cartoon.
(Context: Ongoing "Harvard about to cave" NYT coverage.)
(Context: Ongoing "Harvard about to cave" NYT coverage.)
December 4, 2025 at 12:29 AM
Harvard deserves credit here, and I’ll admit I was wrong in assuming it would cave.
Schools like Northwestern are bending the knee even as Trump’s popularity starts defining new negative numbers, but Harvard has been his Number One target from Day One, and it’s fought back effectively.
Schools like Northwestern are bending the knee even as Trump’s popularity starts defining new negative numbers, but Harvard has been his Number One target from Day One, and it’s fought back effectively.
I’ve seen group portraits of the leaders of the Confederacy that were less white.
Trump, continued: "What the Somalian people have done to Minnesota is not even believable. It’s not even believable. And a lot of it starts with the governor. A lot of it starts with Barack HUSSEIN Obama, because that’s when people started coming in... They want to kiss our country good night."
December 3, 2025 at 9:53 PM
I’ve seen group portraits of the leaders of the Confederacy that were less white.