Great column, as usual, with the caveat/request that we no longer apply the neutral term "conservative" to these radical right-wing justices. Let's honor the original meaning of conservative (cautious? careful? traditional?) and stop allowing them to clothe their judicial activism in the robes of "conservatism." Actually, WE are now the conservatives and they the radicals.
Yes, I agree. But I felt it was monotonous and cumbersome to apply my usual description—reactionary majority—every time I referred to the six justices.
Fear not about being monotonous and cumbersome. It looked strange to see people like the Trump trio of troglodytes on the Supreme Court (plus Thomas and Alito) being called "conservatives." They are so unbelievably backwards, arrogant, cruel and selfish that at a minimum they need to be called "reactionary." Nicole Wallace often calls the former president the "disgraced, twice impeached, coup plotting former president" and I appreciate it every time.
Well-said Lauren. We need new terminology. Same for the "Christian evangelicals" who are right wing. No longer either Christian or evangelical but a new religion of fear, hate, apocalypse, and looming war.
I remind them all the time- if they support TFG, then they are most certainly not "Conservative". A tenet of conservatism is controlling federal debt, which TFG did not do. Oh, yeah- they also stand for "freedom" and "liberty" of all individuals.
SCOTUS hearing a case based on a hypothetical, and not on harm actually caused as based on evidence?!?!? From my layperson's perspective, this erosion of the rule of law and fact-based decision making is hair-on-fire alarming, particularly as the buck stops at SCOTUS. The Dark Money christo-fascist manufactured 303 Creative case would appear to open the floodgates to undo protections currently afforded to all protected classes in addition to sexual preference and identity. Is there a technical legal explanation to put out the fire and save my hair?
Feels amazing that under this arrogant Extreme Court America is being molded against the wishes of the majority of the People into a theocracy while the protests in Iran are moving that country toward democracy. I guess we should be thankful Khomeimi Alito will probably not require American women to wear the hajib. Of course they've already sentenced many women to death by forced pregnancy. The most dangerous form of religion is one that claims to have the one and only right answer and seeks to impose it on others. When the Rule of Law becomes so distorted it must be opposed by protest and other nonviolent means.
Just want to reiterate one of your points “The most dangerous form of religion is one that claims to have the one and only right answer and seeks to impose it on others.”
In this podcast https://play.acast.com/s/f8abe2f0-7415-4247-bc89-e5f3f6eff6b1/6361006372c52000119b1c05 Azadeh Moaveni, a scholar, says that historically the wearing of the hijab has flipped back and forth. It has been used for various political reasons, sometimes modernisation and then control. In 1936 wearing of the veil was outlawed, in the late 1970s 'in protest.' and the wearing of it became mandatory after the 1979 revolution.
The death of Mahsa Amini, a 22 year old student on her way to college is seen as anyone's daughter. "People found the loss of her future..at such a bleak moment in Iran...This was a very shocking incident. Morality policing is a feature of Iranian life but I can certainly not recall in recent memory, years, decades, where a young woman would die in morality police custody."
She goes further to say that Mahsa's Kurdish name is Jian, which is Persian and Urdu for life. "The first protests were sparked, erupted in her hometown area, in the Kurdish region...and they spread quickly." 80-90% of young people are on social media.
She also writes about women in Ukraine, "Ukrainian women have been among the most trafficked in the world since the fall of the Soviet Union." "Women on the Brink, LRB, May 12, 2022)
So I think it is very interesting what you say about the veil as a symbol -- we are in a time of tremendous change where elite groups want to hold power.
Tomorrow, the 7th, SCOTUS will hear Moore v Harper. Their ruling will determine whether our vote counts or whether the state can determine if our vote counts.
Another terrifying case, perhaps the worst one. Our votes really may no longer count because of a rogue and anti-democratic (oxymoronic) Supreme Court.
Actually it wouldn't be the "state" that would be allowed to count the votes-it would be ONLY the state's legislatures who would have input; no longer would governors or state supreme court judges be allowed ANY input; as far as I understand it, this circumvents/subverts the states' Constitutions.
Wow. This was quite a powerful newsletter. We are living in a time which no longer allows us to take a breath. I got a message from a friend who teaches speech at Stephen F. Austin in Nacogdoches, TX. The college has just merged with University of Texas because it was going broke. He said the fine people of Nacogdoches were complaining that ¨they were going to become a liberal indoctrination center for all the Austin socialists.¨ Sigh
Oh, they should be so lucky. Austin is the only sane place in Texas, of any consequence. The evil trio has oozed it’s “religious” bull Schitt all over the land.
The entire Hunter Biden laptop scenario is a Republican fabricated story to discredit President Biden. To begin with there is NO laptop but a hard drive that is in questionable condition and how the drive surfaced, the chain of custody and the contents are all questionable and have been reviewed by several law enforcement agencies. The story was rejected by most legitimate news agencies and the finally the connection of the story and hard drive to Rudy Giuliani makes it suspect to begin with. What is troubling to me is why the media at large doesn’t spend the same equal amount of time investigating the Trump family business dealings and possible criminal activities . Hunter Trump is or was a troubled addicted individual who made some bad choices but none of those choices were illegal and were connected to his father Joe Biden. If the Republicans spent as much time working on legislation to help the American people as they do pushing lies and misinformation imagine what could be accomplished.
-->>"...why the media at large doesn’t spend the same equal amount of time investigating the Trump family business dealings and possible criminal activities..."<<--
The endless attacks on the LGBTQ community by the )what do I call them) the maga fascist right, Putin, other authoritarians is very disturbing and discouraging. Rights and common decency are being shredded in this country and the world. I don’t get it. The hate and bigotry is astounding. We don’t seem to be able to stop them. I wish I didn’t feel this way, but I do. We can’t seem to stop them.
Today's newsletter is an immersion in the disturbing reality of our day. The supreme injustices taking place at the state legislature level to the highest court in the land. And all to limit the very promise of freedoms. To have a voice and to flourish. To love. And to hope.
At this moment, I may be unable, and even unwilling to comprehend the magnitude of it all. Here, and distances far from us. Still, I will not turn away. How could I?
Though at this hour, I offer my attention to Georgia. May all the saints, Martin, Rosa and John Lewis among them, and the choirs of angels, descend upon Georgia. And may the fruits of their labor and the sacrifice of their lives hold us, whomever and wherever we may be, beyond time and place.
Robert, thank you for explaining in detail the 303 Creative SC case. I hadn’t realized that the plaintiff had not yet even designed a wedding website, nor had she ever been ASKED to design one by a gay couple!
As someone who has scant knowledge of legal issues, can you explain how this case ever reached the SC? Doesn’t a plaintiff have to have “standing” to file a suit to begin with? How can the owner of 303 Creative have “standing”, if she has never been asked to do something that is supposedly against her religious beliefs? How can she demonstrate “injury in fact” to her legal interests?
I don’t have actual knowledge, but the obvious way to go about this subterfuge would be by the company seeking a “declaratory judgment” of what its rights would be. But there are supposed to be strict limits on such actions, to prevent exactly the kind of rodomontade that Is going on here. As Robert points out, the company has never been faced with a request for its services in designing a wedding website from anyone. Who knows, the pressure of financial need might change the owner’s mind about the services she wants to offer—a lot of business owners in the South discovered that the principle of segregation was not important enough to go out of business for. And one thing Robert did not mention: the plaintiff company is an LLC, a kind of corporation. Corporations are granted identity by the law, but they are not people. You’ll never see one in the pews. So they should not have freedom of religion, because their only “religion” is supposed to be making money. Unfortunately, the reactionaries on the court overlooked that little fact (which any second-year law student could have told them) in the Hobby Lobby case a few years ago.
You are right, Jonathan, but to seek declaratory relief, a person or company must be subjected to competing demands. Here, there are no competing demands, because no same-sex couple has requested a web design from the plaintiff
Thanks for "rodomontade": boastful or inflated talk or behavior. ex.:. "the corrupting effect the vogue for macho rodomontade may have even upon a civilized man [or woman]."
An LLC is a variant of the corporate form. It is not a sole proprietorship, which can I suppose, mirror the beliefs of its owner, or a partnership which, likewise, might I suppose embody the values of the partners. It is an artificial person.
Very good question. I will cite to a legal analysis that address standing this evening. But in short, standing in free-speech cases has a more liberal standard.
I am reminded how grateful I am to you, Robert, for strongly saying to ignore the polls before the Nov 8 midterms. That was such excellent advice and kept me energized to do text banking right up to the last minute. These thanks are late but heartfelt! May we prevail again in Georgia today!
The GOP is promoting PORN (Hunter Biden's unauthorized photos) and by saying it is a "First Amendment" issue (it's NOT) they are exposing children to not only PORN, but targeting on social media along with misinformation, for ALL.
So, do I have this right?: the sanctimonious, spineless, hypocrite Kevin McCarthy will have the GOP real aloud the Constitution on January 3, amid their complicity in Trump's strategy to terminate the Constitution so Mr. Bone Spur can be Tyrant.
The Republican Party, MAGA and NON-MAGA, has perfected its methods of voter suppression over decades; they are really quite stunningly good at it.
What the heck kind of skill is that to define a political Party in a Democracy?
Second, about the Crappy Court and our truly bizarre news cycle (tat cycles major news topics right off the table), what has ever happened to Justice Thomas and his lovely bride? Pretty much vanished into thin air and soon will bel "dead and gone, lady."
This Court, that is going to be in place pretty much as it now exists, for a very, very long time, frankly scares me to death. As we Americans seem able to do with nearly everything, we will soon get used to it and it will become part of our normal, no longer a problem to be discussed.
The possibility of packing the Court is another topic that seems to have gone "poof."
And, so, I am on my SCOTUS tear this morning. Thank you, Robert, for holding it up for attention and saying clearly and strongly "This Is Not Normal!!!"
The majority on the Extreme Court may impose their reactionary views for now, but they are standing on a cliff-top railing against the gale. They will not succeed in imposing their bigoted view of same-sex relationships on a nation that has rejected it.
Were I 30 years younger, I would stop paying taxes to this government that no longer sees all men and women as equal before the law - as the newer attitude that only those who subject themselves to the opinion of an approved majority - not the knowledge of fact - will be protected by the law takes over.
I am 96 years old now, and such action from me would involve those of my children who are becoming legally responsible for me. I did have an orange jumpsuit when I was young-er and I like the way it looked on me - and how long could I languish??!! L&B&L
Great column, as usual, with the caveat/request that we no longer apply the neutral term "conservative" to these radical right-wing justices. Let's honor the original meaning of conservative (cautious? careful? traditional?) and stop allowing them to clothe their judicial activism in the robes of "conservatism." Actually, WE are now the conservatives and they the radicals.
Yes, I agree. But I felt it was monotonous and cumbersome to apply my usual description—reactionary majority—every time I referred to the six justices.
Fear not about being monotonous and cumbersome. It looked strange to see people like the Trump trio of troglodytes on the Supreme Court (plus Thomas and Alito) being called "conservatives." They are so unbelievably backwards, arrogant, cruel and selfish that at a minimum they need to be called "reactionary." Nicole Wallace often calls the former president the "disgraced, twice impeached, coup plotting former president" and I appreciate it every time.
Add to that "one term" former president, because he hates that SO much!
Thanks, Lauren. This crew are not only not Conservatives, imho, they are barely human
Well-said Lauren. We need new terminology. Same for the "Christian evangelicals" who are right wing. No longer either Christian or evangelical but a new religion of fear, hate, apocalypse, and looming war.
I remind them all the time- if they support TFG, then they are most certainly not "Conservative". A tenet of conservatism is controlling federal debt, which TFG did not do. Oh, yeah- they also stand for "freedom" and "liberty" of all individuals.
SCOTUS hearing a case based on a hypothetical, and not on harm actually caused as based on evidence?!?!? From my layperson's perspective, this erosion of the rule of law and fact-based decision making is hair-on-fire alarming, particularly as the buck stops at SCOTUS. The Dark Money christo-fascist manufactured 303 Creative case would appear to open the floodgates to undo protections currently afforded to all protected classes in addition to sexual preference and identity. Is there a technical legal explanation to put out the fire and save my hair?
Sadly, no. We need to expand the Court. But the moment has passed. 303 Creative was a travesty.
What are the chances of expanding the Court if...when Warnock wins?
https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2020/09/23/senate-hopefuls-supreme-court-expansion-420650
I do not believe Biden is behind it either?
Sad
Maybe, as of tonight, his thinking may change.
Feels amazing that under this arrogant Extreme Court America is being molded against the wishes of the majority of the People into a theocracy while the protests in Iran are moving that country toward democracy. I guess we should be thankful Khomeimi Alito will probably not require American women to wear the hajib. Of course they've already sentenced many women to death by forced pregnancy. The most dangerous form of religion is one that claims to have the one and only right answer and seeks to impose it on others. When the Rule of Law becomes so distorted it must be opposed by protest and other nonviolent means.
Just want to reiterate one of your points “The most dangerous form of religion is one that claims to have the one and only right answer and seeks to impose it on others.”
In this podcast https://play.acast.com/s/f8abe2f0-7415-4247-bc89-e5f3f6eff6b1/6361006372c52000119b1c05 Azadeh Moaveni, a scholar, says that historically the wearing of the hijab has flipped back and forth. It has been used for various political reasons, sometimes modernisation and then control. In 1936 wearing of the veil was outlawed, in the late 1970s 'in protest.' and the wearing of it became mandatory after the 1979 revolution.
The death of Mahsa Amini, a 22 year old student on her way to college is seen as anyone's daughter. "People found the loss of her future..at such a bleak moment in Iran...This was a very shocking incident. Morality policing is a feature of Iranian life but I can certainly not recall in recent memory, years, decades, where a young woman would die in morality police custody."
She goes further to say that Mahsa's Kurdish name is Jian, which is Persian and Urdu for life. "The first protests were sparked, erupted in her hometown area, in the Kurdish region...and they spread quickly." 80-90% of young people are on social media.
She also writes about women in Ukraine, "Ukrainian women have been among the most trafficked in the world since the fall of the Soviet Union." "Women on the Brink, LRB, May 12, 2022)
So I think it is very interesting what you say about the veil as a symbol -- we are in a time of tremendous change where elite groups want to hold power.
Tomorrow, the 7th, SCOTUS will hear Moore v Harper. Their ruling will determine whether our vote counts or whether the state can determine if our vote counts.
I will write about Moore v Harper this evening.
Another terrifying case, perhaps the worst one. Our votes really may no longer count because of a rogue and anti-democratic (oxymoronic) Supreme Court.
Forget the "oxy"...
Actually it wouldn't be the "state" that would be allowed to count the votes-it would be ONLY the state's legislatures who would have input; no longer would governors or state supreme court judges be allowed ANY input; as far as I understand it, this circumvents/subverts the states' Constitutions.
Yes, aka The Independent State Legislature Theory.
Unreal in the “bastion of democracy”
Wow. This was quite a powerful newsletter. We are living in a time which no longer allows us to take a breath. I got a message from a friend who teaches speech at Stephen F. Austin in Nacogdoches, TX. The college has just merged with University of Texas because it was going broke. He said the fine people of Nacogdoches were complaining that ¨they were going to become a liberal indoctrination center for all the Austin socialists.¨ Sigh
Oh, they should be so lucky. Austin is the only sane place in Texas, of any consequence. The evil trio has oozed it’s “religious” bull Schitt all over the land.
The entire Hunter Biden laptop scenario is a Republican fabricated story to discredit President Biden. To begin with there is NO laptop but a hard drive that is in questionable condition and how the drive surfaced, the chain of custody and the contents are all questionable and have been reviewed by several law enforcement agencies. The story was rejected by most legitimate news agencies and the finally the connection of the story and hard drive to Rudy Giuliani makes it suspect to begin with. What is troubling to me is why the media at large doesn’t spend the same equal amount of time investigating the Trump family business dealings and possible criminal activities . Hunter Trump is or was a troubled addicted individual who made some bad choices but none of those choices were illegal and were connected to his father Joe Biden. If the Republicans spent as much time working on legislation to help the American people as they do pushing lies and misinformation imagine what could be accomplished.
-->>"...why the media at large doesn’t spend the same equal amount of time investigating the Trump family business dealings and possible criminal activities..."<<--
The endless attacks on the LGBTQ community by the )what do I call them) the maga fascist right, Putin, other authoritarians is very disturbing and discouraging. Rights and common decency are being shredded in this country and the world. I don’t get it. The hate and bigotry is astounding. We don’t seem to be able to stop them. I wish I didn’t feel this way, but I do. We can’t seem to stop them.
And the Methodist Churches here in NC making their stand on LGBTQ community is a continuation of inching on down the gutter
Today's newsletter is an immersion in the disturbing reality of our day. The supreme injustices taking place at the state legislature level to the highest court in the land. And all to limit the very promise of freedoms. To have a voice and to flourish. To love. And to hope.
At this moment, I may be unable, and even unwilling to comprehend the magnitude of it all. Here, and distances far from us. Still, I will not turn away. How could I?
Though at this hour, I offer my attention to Georgia. May all the saints, Martin, Rosa and John Lewis among them, and the choirs of angels, descend upon Georgia. And may the fruits of their labor and the sacrifice of their lives hold us, whomever and wherever we may be, beyond time and place.
Robert, thank you for explaining in detail the 303 Creative SC case. I hadn’t realized that the plaintiff had not yet even designed a wedding website, nor had she ever been ASKED to design one by a gay couple!
As someone who has scant knowledge of legal issues, can you explain how this case ever reached the SC? Doesn’t a plaintiff have to have “standing” to file a suit to begin with? How can the owner of 303 Creative have “standing”, if she has never been asked to do something that is supposedly against her religious beliefs? How can she demonstrate “injury in fact” to her legal interests?
I don’t have actual knowledge, but the obvious way to go about this subterfuge would be by the company seeking a “declaratory judgment” of what its rights would be. But there are supposed to be strict limits on such actions, to prevent exactly the kind of rodomontade that Is going on here. As Robert points out, the company has never been faced with a request for its services in designing a wedding website from anyone. Who knows, the pressure of financial need might change the owner’s mind about the services she wants to offer—a lot of business owners in the South discovered that the principle of segregation was not important enough to go out of business for. And one thing Robert did not mention: the plaintiff company is an LLC, a kind of corporation. Corporations are granted identity by the law, but they are not people. You’ll never see one in the pews. So they should not have freedom of religion, because their only “religion” is supposed to be making money. Unfortunately, the reactionaries on the court overlooked that little fact (which any second-year law student could have told them) in the Hobby Lobby case a few years ago.
You are right, Jonathan, but to seek declaratory relief, a person or company must be subjected to competing demands. Here, there are no competing demands, because no same-sex couple has requested a web design from the plaintiff
Thanks. My explanation was incomplete.
Thanks for "rodomontade": boastful or inflated talk or behavior. ex.:. "the corrupting effect the vogue for macho rodomontade may have even upon a civilized man [or woman]."
LLC is a limited liability company - not a corporation.
An LLC is a variant of the corporate form. It is not a sole proprietorship, which can I suppose, mirror the beliefs of its owner, or a partnership which, likewise, might I suppose embody the values of the partners. It is an artificial person.
Very good question. I will cite to a legal analysis that address standing this evening. But in short, standing in free-speech cases has a more liberal standard.
I am reminded how grateful I am to you, Robert, for strongly saying to ignore the polls before the Nov 8 midterms. That was such excellent advice and kept me energized to do text banking right up to the last minute. These thanks are late but heartfelt! May we prevail again in Georgia today!
The GOP is promoting PORN (Hunter Biden's unauthorized photos) and by saying it is a "First Amendment" issue (it's NOT) they are exposing children to not only PORN, but targeting on social media along with misinformation, for ALL.
Hypocrisy much GOP?
So, do I have this right?: the sanctimonious, spineless, hypocrite Kevin McCarthy will have the GOP real aloud the Constitution on January 3, amid their complicity in Trump's strategy to terminate the Constitution so Mr. Bone Spur can be Tyrant.
As Rod Serling would say, "There is nothing wrong with your television set. Do not attempt to adjust the picture."
Kinda seems so, huh? 😤
The Republican Party, MAGA and NON-MAGA, has perfected its methods of voter suppression over decades; they are really quite stunningly good at it.
What the heck kind of skill is that to define a political Party in a Democracy?
Second, about the Crappy Court and our truly bizarre news cycle (tat cycles major news topics right off the table), what has ever happened to Justice Thomas and his lovely bride? Pretty much vanished into thin air and soon will bel "dead and gone, lady."
This Court, that is going to be in place pretty much as it now exists, for a very, very long time, frankly scares me to death. As we Americans seem able to do with nearly everything, we will soon get used to it and it will become part of our normal, no longer a problem to be discussed.
The possibility of packing the Court is another topic that seems to have gone "poof."
And, so, I am on my SCOTUS tear this morning. Thank you, Robert, for holding it up for attention and saying clearly and strongly "This Is Not Normal!!!"
Scares me, too!
“The moral bankruptcy of the Republican Party is the issue here, is it not.?
The majority on the Extreme Court may impose their reactionary views for now, but they are standing on a cliff-top railing against the gale. They will not succeed in imposing their bigoted view of same-sex relationships on a nation that has rejected it.
Were I 30 years younger, I would stop paying taxes to this government that no longer sees all men and women as equal before the law - as the newer attitude that only those who subject themselves to the opinion of an approved majority - not the knowledge of fact - will be protected by the law takes over.
I am 96 years old now, and such action from me would involve those of my children who are becoming legally responsible for me. I did have an orange jumpsuit when I was young-er and I like the way it looked on me - and how long could I languish??!! L&B&L
Bless you, Ida! I would stand right next to you.