Reader comments during a consequential weekend.

June 24, 2023

          The purpose of this short note is to open the Comments section for the weekend. But what a weekend! There is a LOT to talk about. As always, please be respectful and “like” worthy comments to promote them to the top for other readers. (Reminder: New comments appear at the bottom of the section.)

Rebellion in Russia? The head of the Wagner Group—Putin’s private mercenary army—is apparently engaged in open rebellion against senior military leaders in the Russian army. See WaPo, Wagner mercenary boss faces arrest over ‘incitement to armed rebellion’. (This article is accessible to everyone.) Disinformation and misinformation abound, making it difficult to understand what is really happening in Russia—a situation that highlights why the continuous lies from the right-wing media in the US are so dangerous to democracy.

One year ago today: Justice Alito stripped women of their full status as citizens under the Constitution. In doing so, he justified the first-ever abrogation of a constitutional right by taunting women, daring them to do something about the reactionary majority’s takeover of the Court:

“Women are not without electoral or political power. It is noteworthy that the percentage of women who register to vote and cast ballots is consistently higher than the percentage of men who do so. In the last election in November 2020, women, who make up around 51.5 percent of the population of Mississippi, constituted 55.5 percent of the voters who cast ballots.”

          We should all look forward to the day when Justice Alito rues his taunt.

Today (June 23, 2023), Justice Thomas inserted a footnote in an immigration case (US v. Hansen) in which he urged the Court to reconsider long-settled precedents, including Griswold v. Connecticut in which the Court recognized the constitutional right to privacy as the basis for the right to contraception. Thomas wrote,

“This case [Hansen] demonstrates just how far courts have drifted from their original station of adjudicating the rights of the parties before them in accordance with law. In an appropriate case, we should carefully reconsider the facial overbreadth doctrine. The facial overbreadth doctrine is but one manifestation of the Court’s larger drift away from the limited judicial station envisioned by the Constitution . . . . Griswold v. Connecticut, (substantive due process).”

Special counsel Jack Smith’s filings on Friday.

          Jack Smith made several filings on Friday. He asked for a continuance of the trial to December—a realistic date given the national security precautions that must be taken to present evidence to the jury. He also filed a list of eighty-four witnesses that Trump should be prohibited from contacting. Finally, he asked for a status conference to discuss the requirements of the Classified Information Procedures Act. As Andrew Weissman explained,

“[Jack Smith’s] CIPA motion is standard, other than the fact that he is taking out the big crayons to teach the district judge [Cannon] about the basics of CIPA - which she will need to master in order to handle the classified discovery issues.”

Why Trump's defense secrets trial should be televised.

          Leading legal commentators are urging that Trump's trial for unlawful retention of defense secret be televised. Thom Hartmann published a terrific explanation of the background and policy reasons justifying televising Trump's trial. See The Hartmann Report, America Deserves to Watch Trump's Trial on TV, Live & In Real Time. It makes for interesting weekend reading. Enjoy!

Concluding Thoughts.

I am building a swing set in our backyard for my granddaughters over the weekend, so barring major developments in Russia, I will talk to you Monday!