I've become weary of not adding political caveats to legal analyses, if anything, because, last summer, we saw that this Supreme Court is no longer wedded to precedent, but is definitely wedded to politics. I say this as someone who is a trained political scientist and definitely not a lawyer. For me, the real question, as far as any cas…
I've become weary of not adding political caveats to legal analyses, if anything, because, last summer, we saw that this Supreme Court is no longer wedded to precedent, but is definitely wedded to politics. I say this as someone who is a trained political scientist and definitely not a lawyer. For me, the real question, as far as any cases taken up by SCOTUS in the very near future, is whether they, too, will follow the oligarchy's lead and submit to Trump and Musk.
We are in an oligarchy now and, examining other oligarchies, one of the first things that strikes is how little the law means in them. What does mean a lot, however, is finding ways to keep an uninformed public aware.
I've become weary of not adding political caveats to legal analyses, if anything, because, last summer, we saw that this Supreme Court is no longer wedded to precedent, but is definitely wedded to politics. I say this as someone who is a trained political scientist and definitely not a lawyer. For me, the real question, as far as any cases taken up by SCOTUS in the very near future, is whether they, too, will follow the oligarchy's lead and submit to Trump and Musk.
We are in an oligarchy now and, examining other oligarchies, one of the first things that strikes is how little the law means in them. What does mean a lot, however, is finding ways to keep an uninformed public aware.
🇺🇸
IN GOD WE TRUST 🇺🇸