I don’t think so.

i was on a panel when she did this and it was even shallower and more unconvincing than it was in print. “buh what about DACA.” yeah, i can think of some relevant distinctions

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

plz excuse me as my brain shorts out at you having never mentioned this

Are there lawyers or people at universities with expertise in this sort of thing? I’m just wondering how we proceduralize these sorts of questions.

Oooof. Miss a good car show. Never have seen any in New Haven, CT. Used to trip over them growing up in TX.

I think Roberts genuinely went full Taney and arrogantly thought that he could impose settlement by immunizing presidents and keeping the country from slipping into a banana republic. I think that majority is a swirl of flavors of unbelievable evil. But totally buy the Roberts as Taney bit.

Issuing that opinion before an obvious fascist’s reelection was so unbelievably dangerous.

Listen, you’re talking to one of the most consistent critics of juristocracy in the American legal academy. I hear you. But even I think there’s a difference between juristocracy and the “the president can order a hit with seal team six” hypos that are now suspended in mid air over the Republic.

(Sorry, just agreeing emphatically with first half of your post. Plz ignore.)

I mean, Trump v. U.S. makes Bush v. Gore look like the work of once-in-a-generation legal talents. I hate it as much as anyone. But I’m sorry, the Rehnquist Court is just in another category of bad.

The originalism blog

This was never about Article II and I really think that’s becoming more obvious by the year.