wmurphy.bsky.social
51 posts
77 followers
240 following
Discussion Master
comment in response to
post
Not on the same scale of import, but puts me in mind of how he cited Decatur for judicial interpretive supremacy in Loper Bright
comment in response to
post
Back in 2001, I figured GW would be known as Butterfly Bush. Was wrong about that.
comment in response to
post
Would that be Co-President Miller?
comment in response to
post
For some of us, self-flagellation about a universally known problem, Biden’s age, doesn’t fit the needs of the moment
comment in response to
post
I know predictions are hard, especially about the future, but why, given the map, should Senate Rs fear losing control in the foreseeable future?
comment in response to
post
She thinks Cricket won’t matter to her 2028 run
comment in response to
post
Ad Max
comment in response to
post
This is an arc that ends with a show on Fox, no?
comment in response to
post
Top 10 Ten Commandments?
comment in response to
post
Anti-incumbency around the world; people don’t like inflation; culture war
comment in response to
post
Was wondering what this would do to OMB operations, then saw at the end that it doesn’t apply to OMB.
comment in response to
post
Let’s stop.
comment in response to
post
Nor was it to Brandeis or Holmes
comment in response to
post
That Mr. Klein is engaged in groupthink is icing for this miserable cake
comment in response to
post
Is it such a good idea for him to draw so much attention to, uh, his 79th birthday?
comment in response to
post
Might wind up with a John Paul I situation
comment in response to
post
Hard to see something sneak up on you when you don’t want to see it and not clear what to do about it.
comment in response to
post
Litigation aversion?
comment in response to
post
Last time I looked, the first two words of the Fifth Amendment were “No person”
comment in response to
post
Body Eat
comment in response to
post
It is the reciprocal of the ratio of precious bodily fluids to fluoride
comment in response to
post
When you pray, do not be like hypocrites, for they love to pray … standing on the street corners to be seen by men?
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
So, they got you, too?
comment in response to
post
Of the probable cause order?
comment in response to
post
It is an enigma wrapped in a riddle inside a state secret
comment in response to
post
IP address in Russia—is that bad?
comment in response to
post
Genuinely delicious, not Red Delicious
comment in response to
post
Assumed it was a reference to the gloss that the President is not an agency subject to the APA. Though the agencies that carry out orders are
comment in response to
post
MGGA
comment in response to
post
What did they do for scenery after Pacino ate all of it?
comment in response to
post
Durbin should have retired many years and blue slips ago, but have very reluctantly come around to idea that this thing was over when House passed CR. Does anyone think that, say a month into shutdown, Rs cave (and lose face) to open gov’t they hate?
comment in response to
post
After the shutdown has gone on for, say, a few weeks, who gives in first? For Dems, like playing chicken with Rs who have frozen steering wheel in place, no?
comment in response to
post
Given media environment and polarization, yeah, that could work
comment in response to
post
The idea that Senate dems will be willing to take heat for a shutdown, which media environment ensures, seems pretty unlikely, no?
comment in response to
post
I recall coverage of a focus group 25 years ago refusing to believe W’s tax plan when it was explained to them.
comment in response to
post
Is he trying to get the visit with King Charles canceled?
comment in response to
post
He did?
comment in response to
post
Didn’t know that was possible
comment in response to
post
Apparently cheap seats are way cheaper this year at a mere $2600.
comment in response to
post
Perfect that they quote Durbin
comment in response to
post
Does the fig leaf the “to the extent permissible by law” muddle the waters, at least as a practical matter?
comment in response to
post
President OMB
comment in response to
post
May just be a question of timing. When S Ct scratches out more of 14th Am, people will write about it
comment in response to
post
Will ultimate scope depend on what S Ct says is “policy advocating”?
comment in response to
post
Hey now, all they are doing is determining, using their neutral legal expertise, the best meaning of the Constitution, statutes, and stuff. Like which parts of the 14th Am count and the like.
comment in response to
post
Odd that it took nearly a century for them to notice.
comment in response to
post
A rule for the ages, or something like that
comment in response to
post
I am a little curious why some name like “Trumplican party” hasn’t taken off.
comment in response to
post
Musk will get his way; MAGA will get anti-immigrant actions focused on blue cities for maximum headlines.