Rooseveltian Reconstruction
@jsmunoz.bsky.social
Amend § 1983 and make Bivens actions statutory law.
Protect trans kids. Trans rights are constitutional and human rights 🏳️⚧️
(he/him)
juliansmunoz.com
Protect trans kids. Trans rights are constitutional and human rights 🏳️⚧️
(he/him)
juliansmunoz.com
when the judge starts writing like this its game over
November 18, 2025 at 11:25 PM
when the judge starts writing like this its game over
me if this keeps up
November 18, 2025 at 6:28 AM
me if this keeps up
alright im done
November 14, 2025 at 10:07 PM
alright im done
November 8, 2025 at 6:25 PM
She's a real one
November 7, 2025 at 1:33 AM
She's a real one
INTERESTING
October 16, 2025 at 4:54 AM
INTERESTING
always a grift
October 9, 2025 at 5:06 PM
always a grift
theyre citing a subreddit and the cass review
October 7, 2025 at 12:10 PM
theyre citing a subreddit and the cass review
this website is freeee
October 5, 2025 at 11:16 PM
this website is freeee
astounding, really, despite being all too expected
September 24, 2025 at 3:01 PM
astounding, really, despite being all too expected
incredible
September 15, 2025 at 4:13 AM
incredible
i just would not have written that the Congress AND the president pass laws even if the president does sign them into effect. From kavanaugh's concurrence in Noem v. Perdomo.
September 13, 2025 at 7:27 PM
i just would not have written that the Congress AND the president pass laws even if the president does sign them into effect. From kavanaugh's concurrence in Noem v. Perdomo.
After reading Harvard v. HHS, Barrett did not, in fact, strike a “conciliatory tone.” She mocked the court to its face.
![fron Harvard v. HHS, “Given this, however, the Court respectfully submits that it is unhelpful and unnecessary to criticize district courts for
"defy[ing]" the Supreme Court when they are working to find the right answer in a rapidly evolving doctrinal landscape, where they must grapple with both existing precedent and interim guidance from the Supreme Court that appears to set that precedent aside without much explanation or consensus.”](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:a6sdf4kjnusp7xaegpt2obdb/bafkreie66it6yas6g77wvg2o4gvdmv2b6chdycrfncehw4khpmrt7y4aou@jpeg)
September 5, 2025 at 5:13 AM
After reading Harvard v. HHS, Barrett did not, in fact, strike a “conciliatory tone.” She mocked the court to its face.
right into my veins
![Given this, however, the Court respectfully submits that it is unhelpful and unnecessary to criticize district courts for
"defy[ing]" the Supreme Court when they are working to find the right answer in a rapidly evolving doctrinal landscape, where they must grapple with both existing precedent and interim guidance from the Supreme Court that appears to set that precedent aside without much explanation or consensus.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:a6sdf4kjnusp7xaegpt2obdb/bafkreieabw2gup53j23v6giw4lekgmle6jl772oxd3ybtqvmxxc7iq6dkq@jpeg)
September 4, 2025 at 4:32 PM
right into my veins
