Sorry, isn’t a cult hit a property that fails to gain mainstream attention but is popularized by a narrow group of dedicated fans?

Yeah, that cult show from the 90s that peaked at 27 million in 1997 and managed 16 million when its revival premiered in 2016.

I think you’re putting entirely too much blame on Ukraine for inflation. The sanctions and conflict have affected the price of oil, but gas prices are also affected by increased demand following the pandemic shutdown and factors like refinery capacity, which itself is at an 8 year low in the U.S.. To add some context,…

1B is the floor, it won’t be Musk dragging things out, it’ll be the Twitter board.

The rest is him railing against incorporation and substantive due process.

I’m not that surprised, law school isn’t really conducive to a structuralist attitude based on power dynamics and political ideology, that attitude will just churn out depressed, cynical, likely alcoholic former lawyers, better to embrace the casuistry and get that good grade in Con Law.

Packing the court would be a nuclear option, one that, if the conservative slide on precedent continues, could gain in popularity. Barrett and Kavanaugh won’t be impeached, impeachment requires 67 senators to convict and Democrats can’t even get 60 to vote one way or the other. The only way to get rid of them is if…

Yes, you’re missing something. The SCOTUS decision in Dobbs is that the Court in Roe was wrong to read a right to privacy in the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment because this right to privacy, or anything to do with sex for that matter, wasn’t a consideration when the 14th Amendment was adopted in 1868, and,…

And the Pete Buttigiegs of the world.

Damage to Trump, so they can embrace DeSantis 2024.

10% of Obama 2008 and 2012 voters voted Trump too. In Sanders’ case there’s the argument that he appealed to socially conservative, pro-union, pro-populist policy voters. There’s also the argument that the majority of those people didn’t vote Democrat in the previous elections, so it’s not like they were guaranteed…

I’m not advocating for it, I’m simply pointing out what OP is talking about, and why Republicans would probably welcome it.

I think OP is arguing more about testing the Court’s enforcement powers, of which it has none, and seeing if the executive would send in the 101st or federalize the national guard to enforce a New York gun nut’s ability to get a CCP, though Republicans would probably welcome further eroding institutional trust and…

Midterms aren’t a national referendum, and if most Americans everywhere really cared about abortion and guns to the extent that they’re presented as caring, Republicans wouldn’t already control a majority of state legislatures and a majority of state governorships. On top of that, not all issues are valued equally,…

But we aren’t talking about anti-government anything, we’re talking about what a “well regulated militia” actually means within the context of the 2nd Amendment and if that can be used as language empowering the state to regulate firearms. And, really, it’s an Amendment to the Constitution, so if you buy into the…

Since we’re discussing what “well regulated” means, you’d be looking for other uses of the term at the time the BoR was written. Article 1 section 8 clause 15 doesn’t include it, it does however include language for organizing, arming, and disciplining a militia. Article 1 section 8 clauses 3 and 5 do include the term…

Except that while “well regulated” had a specific meaning in the 18th century different from that of regulation in the legal sense, “arms” didn’t, the definition of “arms” as armament was the same then as it is now, only the effectiveness of the arms is different, and there the framers didn’t specify that what they…

Well regulated in the 1780s didn’t refer to legal regulation, but rather meant something like well-trained, or effective. The term comes up in other texts from around the time, referring to well regulated armies or militias, well regulated clocks, even a well regulated mind.

Lol the trial was not adjudicating whether the op ed was about Depp, it concerned whether the op ed was defamatory. Big difference!

I took your “worse” in the sense of impactful rather than qualitatively or thematically.