The current majority are apparently the only six people in US history who have correctly understood the Constitution. We're very lucky that they wound up on the Court, else we would have had to rely on the people who actually wrote the Constitution...

Show Post

At some point it'll make much more sense for DOJ simply to say: "Yes, we're doing it because Trump ordered it. See Seila Law; Slaughter."

Show Post

All we get from the opinion is the repeated assertion of the need for presidential accountability through the electoral process — a vision of presidential democracy the Framers rejected and the Roberts Court’s voting rights opinions have crippled. Enough.

Show Post

So which is it? John Roberts and this court majority can see what all nine of the judges in 1935 — including the famed anti-New Deal conservative “four horsemen” — couldn’t: that Humphrey’s is in contradiction with Myers, which is right? If so, why? What is that argument? We don’t get one.

Show Post

So that leaves that it was wrong when it was decided. But was it? The opinion was unanimous, and included four judges who had been in the majority in Myers (including Southerland, its author). I was in their papers two summers ago — none of them thought their vote a departure from Myers!

Show Post