Early contender for off the rails thread of the day.

There is, I think, some irony in the fact that the guy saying “we need to do politics well” has alienated half of his natural constituency in a matter of weeks with poorly thought out columns.

One really striking thing in the Klein/Coates exchange is their differing approaches to politics. Coates: I am part of an inter generational struggle in which we lose and the next generation tries to pick up the torch. Klein’s politics is much more about winning for its own sake.

Kennedy contributed more towards the current state of the nation than 99.9999% of the population. This is the America he worked for decades to create.

FWIW, I think stare decisis is fool’s gold for people who don’t like what the current Court is doing. No one thinks it’s absolute, and any attempt to principledly cabin overrulings fails either because it can’t justify the overruling we want or because it is infinitely malleable.

Wow, major bingo in “people whom I hoped I’d never have to hear from again.”

Democrats should demand an explicit override of the Court’s reading of the ICA. Otherwise there isn’t much of a point to negotiating on spending and appropriations.

Really obvi I’m reading the new Skowronek book, huh?

The constitutional order has always been made plausible by extra constitutional modes of binding the country together again, eg parties, patronage, admin state. Our inability to reimagine the state like our forefathers is the thing worth focusing on.

“I’m emotionally shellshocked right now,” said one professor in the Texas Tech system. “What does it say about academic freedom? It says we don’t have it.” www.nytimes.com/2025/09/26/u...

Well, having centralized our constitutional culture around SCOTUS, we’re left rather defenseless now that the supremes are central to the attack on the rule of law.

Okay, bad news: SCOTUS is and has been abetting unlawfulness. The call is coming from inside the building. Good news (maybe): everybody should be on notice in the future that action RE: SCOTUS is necessary to preserve the rule of law.

Yeeeeaaaasss 😈😈😈

“You see, our policy preferences are measured in lifetime appointments, not two-year election cycles.”

So fed shadow docket action incoming any minute, right?

“You see, our policy preferences are measured in lifetime appointments, not two-year election cycles.”

Is it weird that my 1.5 year old gets out a ladder after dinner and cleans the pan, the cutting board, and the counters?

Wowza! This is great!

Is it weird that my 1.5 year old gets out a ladder after dinner and cleans the pan, the cutting board, and the counters?

It’s almost like we have competing modes of representation to capture different dimensions of the public’s will or something.

Me with a gallon sized container of parsley that could last a lifetime

The thing with the Tylenol is that in the MAGAverse women must be having children. And when they are carrying their mandatory pregnancies they can’t even have a modest painkiller without feeling guilty about the whole business

I think this would be hilarious if the stakes were lower.

*smashes order button*

Deep stuff from @sanjukta.bsky.social in response to @gabrielwinant.bsky.social on the utility of diving into the details of market coordination rather than getting caught up on the "structure" vs "voluntarist" distinction. lpeproject.org/blog/the-law...

Any combination of these authors is a must read. And just typing this out feels redundant b/c if ya know ya know

Just when I didn’t think I could love my kid any more, he starts jamming out to Lee Fields and James Brown 😻

I really think we should be more blunt about the role of the spectrum in the legal academy. Like, let’s be honest, like at least a third of your favorite articles were written by team A.

I really think neuro normals need to realize that most autists are doing totally fine, and a significant portion of us are crushing it. The amount of people with “profound” autism is rather small. Y’all need to chill and go back to another moral panic. Maybe the satanic stuff in 90s? That was wild.

Put Humphrey’s out of its misery.

Random thought: we need to hold a profession-wide mourning for whoever is assigned the task of writing the Homes device for the Robert’s Court. Possibly the most impossible assignment looming out there for someone who might be in grade school right now.

Occasional reminder that narratives that get us to forget a basic past we all were taught is not just the domain of rights. “Collective memory” and narrative matter just as much in SOP & admin.

I really feel bad for Kirk’s widow. That event was so awful. When she makes her appearance, they have pyrotechnics going off on stage like she’s at the WWE. I’m sure she’s not a perfect person, but OMG these people’s use or her loss is genuinely horrifying to watch.

my question for ahmari: the federal reserve is subject to democratic control — congress can, whenever it chooses, alter the terms of fed independence. how and why is the unilateral authority of the president, exercised outside of rule if law, more democratic than congress’s legitimate authority?

I think you have to reckon with the fact that these Southerners somehow went about expanding the federal state. On that frame, the choice to establish ostensibly independent governing authorities (eg, the Fed) takes on a new dimension.

Mail balloting has begun in the Virginia and New Jersey general elections!

👀👀👀

My basic test for how long someone has been in Texas is to sit in traffic with them and see if they get it when I say, “you know what will fix this? Three more lanes.”

I said this at the time but I’ll repeat: I think this is a good thing. Force Republicans to abolish the filibuster. Then the next Democratic Senate won’t have one.

👀👀👀

When they ask me my geographic restrictions on the academic hiring market

When they ask me my geographic restrictions on the academic hiring market

So I take it we’re living in big times “congressional over speech” huh?

I think replies to this thread are indicative of the long way we have to go before we have a healthy relationship with same-party justices.

I really really hope this can be the future of politics and political communication. This is what de-escalation and ending political violence looks like

I think this prediction will age well

Do people think SCOTUS is going to bite on the Due Process angle in the Fed removal case? Curious. I’m in my bubble and it’s seems unlikely, but just curious what other think.

Clothes getting more expensive at a rapid clip b/c of policies, slowly trickling down to the secondary market 😢

RIP. I’ve seen Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid too many times to count. All the President’s Men is eternal.