Reposted by @bdollchair.bsky.social
All these corrupt toadies glommed onto Trump because they misread 2024 as a permanent national shift: The future was MAGA. Now they're like cartoon characters who ran off a cliff and realized there's nothing under them.
Me and @amandamarcotte.bsky.social on this:
newrepublic.com/article/2140...
![Libs Of Chicago @Libs_OfChicago
This is @KatAbughazaleh flipping off one of her potential constituents for having a different point of view on men dressed as women reading to children at the library that taxpayers fund.
[picture of me showing my middle finger to a lady who was calling the crowd predators and pedophiles outside of a Drag Queen Story Hour event]](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:ats4shmeia7i7ildqm3denmd/bafkreiewzht5havk3d2s2tsa6cdxeal5gcxuv4jqthuokib2wd65naen5y)
![The majority’s contention that I reject “ ‘pure textualism’ [a]s insufficiently pliable to secure the result [I] seek,” ante, at 10, stems from an
unfortunate misunderstanding of the judicial role. Our interpretative
task is not to seek our own desired results (whatever they may be). And,
indeed, it is precisely because of this solemn duty that, in my view, it is
imperative that we interpret statutes consistent with all relevant indicia
of what Congress wanted, as best we can ascertain its intent. A methodology that includes consideration of Congress’s aims does exactly that—
and no more. By contrast, pure textualism’s refusal to try to understand
the text of a statute in the larger context of what Congress sought to
achieve turns the interpretive task into a potent weapon for advancing
judicial policy preferences. By “finding” answers in ambiguous text, and
not bothering to consider whether those answers align with other sources
of statutory meaning, pure textualists can easily disguise their own preferences as “textual” inevitabilities. So, really, far from being “insufficiently pliable,” I think pure textualism is incessantly malleable—that’s
its primary problem—and, indeed, it is certainly somehow always flexible enough to secure the majority’s desired outcome.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreih3qdtlloz3yhggypbtwiveqdgzzfgapsnetvq7qsni7wfmyuovoi)
