H-O-T-T-O-G-O
Benjamin Johns
@baj.bsky.social
518 Followers
1011 Following
Just PR'd on my journey to become World's Oldest Man and deserve congratulations. Formerly @theoreticalb (and still theoreticalb@mastodon.social)
-
-
-
-
They would have to do very little to suck $8 a month out of me and one of those things would be to "not give preferential treatment to posts from someone willing to pay $8 a month."
-
Sure. And it's the right move, and it stands a reasonable chance of working. I'm mostly angry at Hochul, who seems to be grasping for the closest reason at hand to throw up her hands and wail that there's nothing to be done because heaven forfend, someone will file a lawsuit.
-
The Texas redistricting will also be challenged in court, and it's fine to say "conservative courts will go along with redistricting because they don't believe in laws, and the liberal courts won't because they do." But if Newsom and Pritzker want to compete in 2028, they'll go down scratching.
-
There are many, many, many ways to get around judicial review. All rely to some degree on a helpful or at least compliant judiciary, willing to either side with your action or delay review of it past the window where that review is actionable. See Bush v Gore. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v....
Bush v. Gore - Wikipedia
-
You're probably right that "liberal courts don't make ideologically driven decisions so it won't happen." But I'll be disappointed if governors and state legislatures use that as an excuse not to be as conniving and strategic and cynical as possible in getting it done.
-
If a Republican was faced with a friendly but not THAT friendly supreme court and a desire to redistrict, they would design a trigger to install a new map that happened exactly the instance before laws no longer permit judicial review because it is too close to the election day to change it back.
-
In the extreme, yes, SCOTUS could decide to just go ahead and have Governors they don't like imprisoned; there's no limit on their power. We might already be there!
In practice, these are state constitutional issues, and state supreme courts, not SCOTUS, would hear them.
