Profile avatar
blubbator.bsky.social
kindness is really underrated, he/him, 🦕🏳️‍⚧️
685 posts 617 followers 1,140 following
Prolific Poster
Conversation Starter

This isn't just a secret police force. this is a military branch

If the symbolism was any heavier, it would pull the rest of reality into it like a neutron star

Someone tell this dumbfuck you either embrace naked power in the service of fascism and shrug off the criticism, OR you get to whine about "harsh words" targeting judges. You don't get to do both, dipshit, and you made your choice. apnews.com/article/supr...

"but what do you want Dems to do?" This is literally the baseline. This is minimum effort I'm looking for. More would be better

The Right really is in disarray because they cannot seem to figure out if they should push “Zohran Mamdani is going to bring Sharia Law” or “Zohran Mamdani treats his wife with too much equality” as a smear campaign, so they are doing both.

I do feel like there is a significant portion of the legal academy would clap like seals (but solemnly) if the Supreme Court ordered babies be thrown into a woodchipper for Moloch if the "reasoning" was sound

they never actually leave in droves

I shit you not: die SPD hat unironisch dieses Video hochgeladen

Get your cis friends to read this. It reveals how the anti-trans hate groups are really part of a web of extremist right-wing hate groups…

LOL Sozen

Call me a prude, but the beak and talons would scare me

Faustregel: Politiker*Innen, die bereit sind die eine schwache Gruppe vor den Bus zu werfen, werden auch bereit sein noch andere schwache Gruppen vor den Bus zu werfen. FĂźhlt euch nicht zu sicher, dass es euch nicht auch irgendwann betreffen kann.

Heute habe ich meinen Nachbarn erschlagen. Ich halte das für falsch, trotzdem habe ich es getan. Die Entscheidung ist mir außerordentlich schwer gefallen - und ich blablabla .... Was eine unsägliche Scheisse und was für eine Selbstherrlichkeit und Frechheit, sich erklären zu wollen

“No one disputes that the Executive has a duty to follow the law. But the Judiciary does not have unbridled authority to enforce this obligation—in fact, sometimes the law prohibits the Judiciary from doing so.” It‘s this type of "rationality" in elite spaces that has driven us to the brink.

no amount of free money is going to get people to have children in a stagnant society of rampant corruption and dwindling opportunity

What do you call a court that says parents have a constitutional right to prevent their kids from seeing storybooks with gay people at school, but no right to provide their children with access to gender-affirming health care?

Good night

While all LGBTQIA+ youth face homelessness at higher rates than their cis peers, trans youth experience it at the highest rates One study by The Trevor Project found that 38% of trans girls/women, 39% of trans boys/men, and 35% of nonbinary youth have experienced homelessness or housing instability

Miami just canceled its November election & pushed it to 2026. No public vote, just canceled. Mayor Suarez & Joe Carollo get to stick around an extra year. This feels like a power grab. If one city can delay elections for “participation,” what’s to stop others from doing it to silence opposition?

At the end of the day, the question before the Court is whether people can be disappeared off streets in this country, by armed men wearing masks, to be imprisoned in a foreign land without trial. Everything else is legal mumbo-jumbo.

“We’re the good guys,” I tell myself as a 6-year-old leukemia patient pees his pants in fear. I adjust my black mask and sunglasses in the mirror, making sure to hide my identity. “I am not evil,” I whisper.

💯

It’s every parent’s nightmare, isn’t it? you check your child’s bulletproof backpack and find a picture book about gay penguins

this is like thinking the point of eating a meal is to experience having shat

Expert historian of the Constitution: “Once a constitutional crisis becomes an endemic condition, the term no longer usefully describes our collapsing system….we live in an era of constitutional failure when the relevant institutions cannot fulfill their responsibilities.” Fr @jrakove.bsky.social

Es ist ein Projekt, in dem ein Präsident (so er Republikaner ist) machen darf, was er will, egal wie klar es gegen die Verfassung verstößt und ein Präsident (so er Demokrat ist) keine Politik betreiben darf, weil die eigentliche Macht im Staat - der SCOTUS - das juristisch verhindert.

Die Art und Weise, mit der der Supreme Court in den letzten 10 Jahren faktisch eine Situation geschaffen hat, die man als theokratischen Exekutivautoritarismus bezeichnen kann, ist fast so schockierend, wie der Umstand, dass Presse und die Demokratische Partei sich weiterhin weigern das zu sehen.

Yes. And you can appeal it to the Supreme Court but even if you win there it still only applies to you. Anyone who wants relief has to bring suit individually. The ruling ignores the possibility that the executive will rely on this very ruling to knowingly ignore the Constitution.

First, SCOTUS issued a sweeping grant of immunity to a president who committed unprecedented crimes in office Now they have prevented courts from stopping this administration's open and routine violations of the law Democracy and the rule of law are on the line www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...

There's really nothing in this opinion limiting some neo-Bob Jones University types from demanding public schools stop talking about interracial marriage on religious grounds.

Just to give a sense of how insane the birthright citizenship stuff is, this is what the constitution actually says about the matter. There is literally nothing controversial about it. Either 2+2=4 or nothing means anything.

“No right is safe in the new legal regime the Court creates.” –Justice Sonia Sotomayor. One of the most chilling sentences I have ever read.

Yes, this is bad for porn. But porn famously has no clear legal definition. As such: This is a direct path to censoring anything the GOP wants to censor and can argue is “adult” - info on birth control, queer identity, anything about trans people or gender diversity or safe sex or HIV or drag or

Americans don’t want to believe this. But here we are.

there is no jurisprudence at work here. the republican court believes that anything a republican president is presumptively constitutional, even if it directly violates the unambiguous constitutional text and causes total chaos in law and policy.