And all of this 5-4 hubbub to come to the conclusion, “Trump is allowed to be charged specifically because the court has said there will be no consequence whatsoever.”
2 Likes
I hope you are wrong, but I am certainly not counter predicting.
That said, Thomas is 76 and Alito is 74. We could see two more Heritage Foundation picks in 2025 and 2026. I’m sure Thomas and Alito will face intense pressure to step down early in Trump’s term so that he can name their successors. One has to realistically believe that the Dems stand a good chance of winning in 2028, so this could be the GOP’s last chance to pick Justices for a while.
The idea of 5 Trump nominated SCOTUS justices, with the oldest being Gorsuch (currently 57) is kinda terrifying. But they way that people will actually rule is a crap shoot and it might not be absolutely awful. People thought that ACB was going to be an extremist, but while I disagree with her on a lot, she is really smart and much better than the men on the court.
2 Likes
I believe there is some reasonableness in placing limits around a local (or even state) jurisdiction having an impeding impact on the federal government. An state level example is not letting a county sheriff prevent a legislator from attending a legislative session because they were “speeding” on the way through the county. Yes, this can be abused, and there are rule of law considerations, but that’s why there is judicial review.
Exactly. Replacing Thomas with another ACB would be an improvement. Alito too though it’s a smaller gap.
Except ACB was specifically being saved as a potential replacement for RBG, while Thomas and Alito would be replaced with someone closer to them ideologically.
I agree that she has been the best jurist of the three from his first term, but I have no expectation that the next two appointments will be anywhere close to moderate.
Well we can always hope. She was a Heritage Foundation pick.
Listening to oral arguments. Alito has such a punchable voice, listening to him talk about “girlie mags” makes my skin crawl. KBJ shows up to cases prepared, other justices should follow suit.
Are you criticizing his word choice or just cringing at the thought of Alito being a sexual human being?
I think “girly mag” was common parlance in the 70s and even into the 80s, so really he’s just showing his age.
The J. Geils Band song “Centerfold” came out in 1981 and includes the lyrics “I’m looking through a girly magazine”. They needed “magazine” to rhyme with “pages in between” in the next line otherwise the lyricist likely would have chosen “mag” over “magazine”.
You’d think someone could figure out appropriate language in the intervening nearly half century.
Is “girly mag” bad or inappropriate? It doesn’t seem bothersome to me. I’d probably say “skin magazine” myself, but it wouldn’t irritate me if someone else said “girly mag”.
Kind of sounds derogatory. Just seems like anachronistic language to me.
My guess;
a) referring to a grown woman as a girl can be insulting
b) girl = minor female so a girly mag implies child porn
1 Like
My issue is partly a visceral reaction to his voice itself. If you were to cast a voice actor for a movie character who goes to old school porn theaters in a trench coat, he would be a good choice. And partly it is frustrating to listen to him use outdated language on the subject while simultaneously wanting to impose his own sexual morality on the rest of the country, regardless of what is legally logical.
1 Like
It’s disturbing how Americans love freedom for themselves but seem to hate others having it.
“Freedom for me not for thee!”
It is the GOP/MAGA motto.
1 Like
No, that is not the implication with that terminology. Playboy and Hustler are “girly mags”. They are not child porn. (I mean, not intentionally so… it wouldn’t shock me to learn that a 17 year old outwitted one at some point and got her photo included in an issue. But certainly they are mostly 18+ and operate with that intent.)
I’m saying that’s why the term is problematic. Call it porn and not a girly mag.
2 Likes
Fully agree. I wouldn’t call Playgirl a “boy mag”. Let’s not use child’s terminology where euphemisms aren’t required.
Sure, but I’ll just note that it’s not “Playman” and “Playwoman”; it’s “Playboy” and “Playgirl”.
It seems not unusual to use “boy” and “girl” when it comes to titillating content.
I also don’t see shows advertising “Women Women Women!!!” No, they say “Girls Girls Girls!!!”. Or in the case of Deja Vu “1000 Beautiful Girls and 3 Ugly Ones”, which is a popular spot for three female friends to pose for a pic out front by the sign.
So insisting that “Girly Mag” is offensive but all the other stuff is all ok seems like an exceedingly odd hill to die on.