And so where are Pelosi and Schumer? They only attack progressive Democrats and show no spine when it comes to Trump.
Pelosi is too old, too rich, too white, and too much of a Republican. She is a big reason the Democrats have lost the labor base and the working class and the middle class. Pelosi will never support single payer healthcare - her husband made millions from giant pharmaceuticals and wall street insurance companies!
Probably that their spouses and children wouldnât be kneecapped.
I think Maxwell Smart is going to be Trumpâs new lawyer. âWould you believeâŚâ
And the attorneys arguing against the DoJ certainly know this and will place that fact before the judge. I think the judge will then be obliged to ask the DoJ exactly what it is they are trying to pull.
In our house, thatâs called âGetting Marie Kondoâd.â The pressure to spark joy is unbelievable around here.
I canât imagine that Trump really understands or cares about the census. He really inked cares about staying in office until the statute of limitations protects him from prosecution. Of course, given his inability to stop obstructing justice, he may need to stay indefinitely.
What this is actually about is all the headlines saying he had been defeated, had backtracked, etc. he has to prove that he isnât a loser
Hereâs the new reason: âThe coloreds and âMexicansâ will be better off if they are divided into districts where smart (but not college-educated) white people can help them make the right decisions.â
Not sure about that but I wonder if Scalia put out those books âMaking your Caseâ and âReading Lawâ to get around the ethical bar on ex parte conversations with parties before the Court. Given how disingenuous he was I wouldnât put it past him. I also wonder about Kennedyâs background here; his father was a California state judge who had no problem meeting at home with parties interested in various matters; perhaps like father like son like former clerk?
I have zero doubt that the census will be used in this manner. I donât know if Trump will state this publicly, yet.
I donât think the Roberts Court would require a reason. Just as in the travel ban case, they would find that the Secretary of Commerce has broad authority to promulgate rules and regulations to implement the Census Act. The problem in this case is that Ross offered a rationale. When that rationale was shown to be first class BS Roberts was forced to concede that the rule was capricious and arbitrary, about the only basis on which it could be rejected.
I just donât see Roberts putting that genie back in the bottle at this point even if he wished he could. He would embarrass himself and the court irreparably, and turn it into a laughingstock. At this point they have to come up with another, actually compelling and legitimate reason, filed in a whole new brief, and thereâs just not enough time at this point.
Thatâs been my theory since the âripped from the dead guyâs hard driveâ evidence came out. Before that the SC had cover to let them add the question, after that the emperor was exposed. Yuk. That is not an image I want to keep. 
Edited to add:. I would not be surprised if they wanted the story about using DMV data for facial recognition out as a sanctioned leak
If Trump does do it, what are Dems going to do, impeach him? Har, har, har, harâŚ
There are two different lawsuits. The one the SCOTUS ruled on was New York vs. Dept. of Commerce, the Friday decision ruling was Kravitz vs Dept. of Commerce out of a Maryland federal Court. The later is an effort to use discovery to include the damning evidence gleaned from the documents of Hoeffler, the now deceased republican operative.
Technically wasnât Robertsâ dilemma basically that he was given no viable rationale to overrule the lower court ⌠he essentially begged the DOJ to give him an excuse .
From the article: âLawyers from the departmentâs Consumer Protection Branch were stepping in to represent the administration in the case.â
Ummm⌠the Trump Justice Dept. [oxymoron alert] has a CONSUMER PROTECTION DIVISION?
Well, no wonder the âconsumer protectionâ guys got this gig. Just like the guys handling civil rights and voter protection, they usually have NOTHING TO DO.
Highly doubtful. Any significant movement regarding motivation at this pointâŚregardless of which lawyers are arguing itâŚputs Ross at high risk of perjury. He has stated his reasons, he has given sworn testimony. Thatâs all a matter of record with the Court now.
All this + careerists found the line too far (integrity) and real hacks were needed to step to the plate.
Not only are you too cynical, you need a larger size tin foil hat.
Roberts is no liberal, but he would never, ever collude with DoJ in the manner you suggest.
His history as a jurist says you are dead wrong.
This is an issue before the Courts. Although Trump does it all the time, itâs considered bad form for another branch of government to comment on court decisions before they are finalized. It would be seen by the Court as an attempt by the House and Senate Dem leaders to influence the judicial decision making process.