iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Grandpa Millennial here, and I taught my kids I LEARNED IT FROM WATCHING YOU for them to use against me when I yell at them for being device zombies

1140

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 3h

CA8 has proven its full MAGAnitude so now they’re hoping it’ll punish the district judges who dared to defy the admin’s rampant illegality

274

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

Just spitballing here but maybe dude checked the temperature among colleagues to find there's a broad consensus to say SCOTUS doesn't (yet) have jurisdiction in the Suncor case, and so his vote for the oil companies on the merits won't matter

6597

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 28/09/2026

Why is this Normie GWB judge handing his seat over for some Mississippi MAGA nut to fill? [checks date, polls] Maybe this Normie GWB judge doesn't want a Dem filling his seat but also hopes a Dem Senate will force Trump to make a consensus non-MAGA pick? [checks self] Shrug emoji

news.bloomberglaw.com

Trump Gets Fifth Circuit Vacancy as Bush Appointee Steps Back

President Donald Trump will have another opportunity to appoint a judge to the influential US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

371

Reposted by Mike Sacks

Bobby Kogan @bbkogan.bsky.social · 26/09/2026

I think something to consider here is that Collins voted to confirm Russ Vought as OMB Director despite the fact that he said a billion times that he thought Trump had a constitutional right to illegally impound funds, and now she’s doing shocked Pikachu reactions.

Sen. Susan Collins • fAl
劉
@SenatorCollins
X.com
Without warning or consultation, Congress just received an $810 million package of pocket rescissions from the Administration. This is the most recent attempt by this Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to undermine Congress's Constitutional power of the purse.
This move shows that OMB intentionally withheld these funds for months to execute this unlawful cancellation of appropriations that were approved on a bipartisan basis and signed into law.

Not only is the delay itself an impoundment that was not reported to Congress, but also it is a usurpation of Congress's appropriations powers.
OMB is an agency of the executive branch. It does not get to decide which programs are worth funding.
The independent Government Accountability Office has concluded that pocket rescissions are unlawful and not permitted by the Impoundment Control Act. Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law.
I will work with my colleagues to address these illegal actions.

11738531016

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 25/09/2026

Saturn eats sons Venus eats moons Mars eats balls

170

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 25/09/2026

Remember how SCOTUS almost required states to publicly fund religious charter schools but didn’t bc Barrett’s refusal caused a 4-4 deadlock? Yeah she’s not gonna recuse from this one. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

01814

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 24/09/2026

AND WHEN WE FINALLY DO PUT THE HEAT ON WE SHALL HOLD THE LINE AT 65 DEGREES

4242

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

Aaaaaand this case that motivated such early Trump 2.0 authoritarian bravado just mooted out storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

053

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

This is a really good and thorough piece that doesn’t acknowledge the existential and imminent caveat that comes after the post’s em-dash until the penultimate paragraph! Like, SCOTUS is hearing oral args on First Monday in the case that could kill all the cases this entire article is about!

031

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

Sometimes a TV show is so transcendent that they just gotta name a street after it

2131

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 22/09/2026

My first time talking with @adamgurri.liberalcurrents.com and the @liberalcurrents.com crew but won’t be the last!

0207

Reposted by Mike Sacks

Adam Gurri @adamgurri.liberalcurrents.com · 22/09/2026

Big thanks to @mikesacks.bsky.social for having me on @legalafmtn.bsky.social to talk about The Reconstruction Papers! www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aGN...

youtube.com

Trump PANICS as 2028 Plan to DESTROY HIM is REVEALED...

YouTube video by Legal AF

0135

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 22/09/2026

Low-key MAGA CA8 not so low-key MAGA now

2131

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 20/09/2026

Someone read the ballroom case and told Dozymandias he should throw in a natsec purpose to fortify any legal arguments against construction of a monument that we’d reduce to rubble anyway.

2242

Reposted by Mike Sacks

c-a-m @cad6711.bsky.social · 19/09/2026

Thread: I represent children in ORR custody. At Thurs' juvenile court hearing, I sat stunned as a young, female DHS attorney argued, one-by-one, that the judge should order each child deported, without a hearing. What she was arguing shocked the conscience. These were children. My one client is...

59356

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 19/09/2026

Trump’s DOJ says it will not enforce the federal law barring gun sales to 18-20 year olds because it violates the 2nd Amendment. SCOTUS has so far declined every opportunity to resolve the circuit split. www.justice.gov/olc/media/14...

(Slip Opinion)
Application of 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(1) and (c)(1) to
Young Adults
prevents young adults, who are members of "the people" to whom the Second
Nation's tradition of firearm regulation, which it cannot do.
September 17, 2026
MEMORANDUM OPINION FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Our laws deem an eighteen-year-old "mature enough to be drafted, vote, serve as a juror, and be sentenced to deathại One such eighteen-year-old represented the United States at the Tokyo Olympics in 2020, shooting skeet? Yet, due to statutes predicated on concerns over an eighteen-year-old's ability to handle a pistol as a responsible adult, it would have been a federal felony if a licensed dealer had sold her such a firearm before she left or after she returned to her studies at the University of Texas at Arlington. See 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(1), (c)(1). You have asked whether that restriction may be enforced against otherwise law-abiding citizens between the ages of eighteen and twenty who seek to purchase a handgun consistent with the individual right to keep and bear arms recognized by District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), and
"fleshed out," Wolford v. Lopez, 146 S. Ct. 2032, 2043 (2026), in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111 (2022). It may not. Section 922(b)(1) and (c)(1) may not be enforced to impose criminal penalties on dealers who sell handguns to a class of law-abiding adults who, in nearly every other relevant respect, are members of the political community.

In sum, because the modern federal age restrictions limit young adults between the ages of eighteen and twenty from obtaining arms, they "fall[] within the plain text of the Second Amendment" and are "presumptively unconstitutional." Wolford, 146 S. Ct. at 2044. As we have not identified
"any analogue or collection of analogues" that "is 'relevantly similar' to the modern law," our view is that the government is unable to overcome this presumption. Id. (quoting Bruen, 142 S. Ct. at 2132).
In reaching this conclusion, we are aware that we are not writing on a
government (state or federal) to bar young adults from obtaining firearms has deeply divided members of the federal bench. 42 Having carefully considered these courts' decisions, we do not think that their reasons for reaching a contrary conclusion under Bruen can be reconciled with the Court's intervening clarifications in Hemani and Wolford. 4 Thus, we do
advice it gives you as you assist the President in the performance of his independent constitutional duty to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." U.S. Const. art. II, § 3; see also Application of the Rehabilita-
Patients with Severe Mental Illness or Disabilities, 50 Op. O.L.C. _, at
*12 (June 18, 2026); Section 1715 at *14; cf. Eric S. Fish, Prosecutorial Constitutionalism, 90 S. Cal. L. Rev. 237, 254 (2017) (noting that "a number of important constitutional rights go underenforced by judges"_and
42 Compare Reese, 127 F.4th 583 (invalidating the federal age restrictions at issue here), Worth, 108 F.4th 677 (invalidating Minnesota's age-based public-carry re-
Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, 121 F.4th 96 (sustaining Colorado's age-based purchase restrictions).
1687.

that Executive Branch officials should "supplement judges' enforcement
ing processesằ_.
We conclude by noting, however, a few limits on this opinion. For ex-ample, we do not address the age-neutral conditions and qualifications on commercial sales, the prohibition on the possession of handguns by those under eighteen, 18 U.S.C. § 922(x), or even the enhanced investigative period Congress has prescribed for purchasers under twenty-one, id.
§ 922(t) (1)(C); see also generally McRorey v. Garland, 99 F.4th 831 (5th Cir. 2024). And nothing in this opinion should be read to cast doubt on the distinct prohibitions of section 922(g), certain of which the Supreme Court has recently discussed with approval. See Hemani, 146 S. Ct. at 1692 n.6.
tion as it applies to sales to persons under eighteen, who-though part of
"the people" for the purposes of the Constitution-may constitutionally be subject to certain legal disabilities until they reach the age of majority,
Part II.B.2; cf. Paxton, 145 S. Ct. at 2300.
Instead, we conclude only that section 922(b)(1) and (c)(1) may not be enforced to impose criminal penalties on dealers who sell handguns, the
"quintessential self-defense weapon," Heller, 554 U.S. at 629, to a class
of the political community.
T. ELLIOT GAISER
Assistant Attorney General
Office of Legal Counsel

43120

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 19/09/2026

CA5, 2-1, says federal law banning buying and selling guns across state lines violates the 2nd Amendment. Reagan, Trump judges in majority. Normie GWB judge in dissent. www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub...

Before SMITH, HAYNES, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.
JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge:
Plaintiffs unsuccessfully sought a permanent injunction against sev-
Bruen, they implicate the Second Amendment's plain text, making them pre-
Case: 25-11206
Document: 83-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/18/2026
No. 25-11206
den to justify the provisions as consistent with the nation's tradition of firearms regulation. We reverse and render judgment for plaintiffs.

Haynes, Circuit Judge, dissenting:
I respect the majority opinion, but I respectfully dissent. I agree with
the district court’s decision that the several provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 922
discussed in this case are not unconstitutional under the Second
Amendment. That is all that is in play in this case, thus, I would affirm.

163

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 18/09/2026

Trump's doing this bc a Trump-majority CADC panel green-lit last year his banning the AP from the Oval Office pending appeal of the injunction against him (see grabs)...and the same 2 Trump judges are on the merits panel that heard oral args in Nov. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

33712

Reposted by Mike Sacks

Kevin Collins @kwcollins.bsky.social · 18/09/2026

Do we think in conference as justices go around the room he shouts "STOP THE COUNT" before KBJ weighs in? On second count, don't answer that.

15913

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 17/09/2026

CA2 says federal government can conduct suspicionless searches of any international traveler's cellphones - even U.S. citizens! - upon arrival at the border. The 2nd Circuit covers JFK Airport. Biden judge concurs in the judgment to say WTF! storage.courtlistener.com/pdf/2026/09/...

14217

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

Great review of @daphnarenan.bsky.social and @nikobowie.bsky.social’s SUPREMACY, and @rachelshelden.bsky.social’s THE POLITICAL SUPREME COURT. Read the review AND the books!

0145

Reposted by Mike Sacks

Niko Bowie @nikobowie.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

Trump says the Court's rulings against him are "shockingly bad." But the rulings to worry about are all the ones putting him above the law. @daphnarenan.bsky.social and I are in Slate this morning on the difference between a Court that enforces acts of Congress and one that defies them.

slate.com

John Roberts’ New Role Model Demonstrates Everything Wrong With the Supreme Court

If the court is curling up anywhere, it is at the feet of a presidency increasingly unchecked by law.

25423

Reposted by Mike Sacks

Court Accountability Action @courtacctability.bsky.social · 15/09/2026

Donald Trump's crude ploy to take over mail-in ballots was defeated, but the Roberts Court knows that it has already won multiple battles to defeat our democracy. @mikesacks.bsky.social breaks it down.

175

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 15/09/2026

This is getting way out of hand www.ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/fi...

126010

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 15/09/2026

Out-of-context broken clock: “It is a Court that will go down as having rendered some of the most destructive, hurtful, and damaging decisions in our Country's history.”

2244

Reposted by Mike Sacks

Niko Bowie @nikobowie.bsky.social · 14/09/2026

I've been learning from @adamserwer.bsky.social about the Court and Reconstruction for a decade, so talking with him about Supremacy is such a treat. Join us tomorrow at 7 ET: tinyurl.com/supremacybooktalk

Supremacy: How Rule by the Court Replaced Government by the People

A virtual book talk with authors and Harvard law professors Nikolas Bowie and Daphna Renan

Moderated by The Atlantic's Adam Serwer

Tuesday Sept. 15
7:00 PM to 8:00 PM ET

47427

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 15/09/2026

Alito and Thomas want the vote suppressed in 2026 to better ensure a Republican Senate so they can retire in 2027 and 2028, respectively, confident that their Trump-chosen successors will be confirmed.

1132387

Reposted by Mike Sacks

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 14/09/2026

The inevitable lawsuit against this—and the rescission of the endangerment finding—will result in SCOTUS overruling Mass v EPA and supercharging Scalia’s dissent to declare that the Clean Air Act outright forbids the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases. The 2029 Dem trifecta must amend the CAA.

414448

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 14/09/2026

Note that Nichols had balked at blocking Trump’s EO as unripe before USPS issued its final rule. The Roberts majority agreed when a different case reached SCOTUS first. I think Roberts will have a diff majority to agree with Nichols this time too when they rule any day now on the same diff case.

0236

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 14/09/2026

414448

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 11/09/2026

Three Dems on panel arrive at same conclusion under Loper Bright as they would have come under Chevron, just as any of their Republican colleagues woulda sided with Trump under either legal regime as well.

183

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 11/09/2026

Wait did I just hear Hasil Adkins in a Google commercial?

221

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 10/09/2026

I red-teamed @nikobowie.bsky.social & Daphna Renan’s args vs judicial supremacy. “You hypocrites weren’t complaining when SCOTUS was with your side!” “Keeping vertical review still lets judges to constitutionalize their policy preferences!” “Your historical champions lost!” Here’s how they respond:

youtu.be

Roberts Court REELS as Congress is PRIMED to TAKE BACK COURT?!?!

YouTube video by Legal AF

1209

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 10/09/2026

Your SCOTUS allies not saving you from SCOMO’s contempt threat will do that to you

Denny Hoskins, CPA
Missouri Secretary of State
For Immediate Release: Sept. 10, 2026
Statement from Missouri Secretary of State Denny
Hoskins
Following the United States Supreme Court's stay, the only governing court order in effect is from the Missouri Supreme Court. In accordance with that order, my Office is directing local election authorities to use the 2022 congressional map.

1144

Reposted by Mike Sacks

Lawrence Hurley @lawrencehurley.bsky.social · 10/09/2026

JUST IN: Just minutes after Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins filed at SCOTUS, the court, with no noted dissents, blocks his attempt to use a newly drawn GOP map that the Missouri Supreme Court said he couldn't:

412337

Mike Sacks @mikesacks.bsky.social · 10/09/2026

This 9/11 remembrance from @hillaryclinton.bsky.social makes me so furious on so many levels. www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/0...

The EPA continued to be unhelpful and at times untruthful. The full extent of the deception did not emerge until August 2003. An investigation by the EPA’s inspector general found that, in the aftermath of the attacks, White House officials instructed the agency to reassure New Yorkers that the air was safe to breathe, even though deadly contaminants such as asbestos and lead were present. The agency “did not have sufficient data and analyses” to back up its statements, the report said, noting that “competing considerations” such as reopening Wall Street played a role in their deception.

I believe that President Bush himself genuinely wanted to do the right thing for New York. Three days after the attacks, he stood on a pile of rubble at Ground Zero, put his arm around a firefighter, and pledged his support. But members of his administration were eager to restore a sense of “open for business” normalcy. Alarming reports about toxic air near Wall Street would have made for inconvenient messaging.

In my decades of public service, I have rarely been as angry as I was the day that the damning inspector general’s report was released. I thought of the firefighters working around the clock in poisonous dust and soot. I thought of Sister Cindy Mahoney, a nun who volunteered as an EMT at Ground Zero and prayed with weary workers—a few years later, she died of severe respiratory failure and asked for her body to be autopsied for evidence of the effects of exposure. I thought of every resident and responder I’d met with over the past two years, each with their own quiet stories of loss and heroism.

The government had told them the air was safe to breathe. It wasn’t. And they knew that.

Representative Jerry Nadler and I immediately organized a press conference on the steps of city hall, just blocks from Ground Zero, along with doctors and first responders who’d been lied to. I am usually someone who keeps her cool. This time, I lost my temper. “I know a little bit about how White Houses work,” I said, my fury rising. “I know somebody picked up a phone, somebody got on a computer, somebody sent an email, somebody called for a meeting, somebody in that White House, probably under instructions from somebody further up the chain, told the EPA: ‘Don’t tell the people of New York the truth.’ And I want to know who that is.”

The Bush administration never really came clean about its lies about the dirty air. For a lot of people, it became just one more example of government corruption and incompetence. As time passed and more responders became sick, I pushed to expand medical monitoring and treatment. But media attention moved on, and the political will in Washington to act dissipated. In 2005, Congress tried to rescind $125 million that had already been appropriated for injured responders’ health monitoring. It took a lot of shaming and arm-twisting to get it restored.

In 2006, Mount Sinai Hospital reported that nearly 70 percent of the roughly 9,500 responders it examined had developed a new or worsened respiratory symptom. That same year, James Zadroga, an NYPD detective who had spent more than 450 hours at Ground Zero, died after becoming gravely ill. His death made painfully clear what many responders and their families had been telling us for years: This wasn’t simply about monitoring people to see whether they might get sick. People were already sick, and they needed care.

0102