Justice Stevens Papers Through 2005 To Be Made Available Starting Tomorrow

Today the Library of Congress announced that, tomorrow, it will be making available the papers of the late Justice John Paul Stevens through 2005.  The release of a Justice’s papers is often pretty significant for Supreme Court nerds and historians alike, as the papers include drafts of opinions and memos among the Justices that shed light on the public opinions later released.  You need to be in DC to see the papers at the Library of Congress—they won’t be posted online— but I assume particularly important documents will get out pretty quickly.  You can read the 299-page finding aid to the Stevens papers that will be available here.

The post Justice Stevens Papers Through 2005 To Be Made Available Starting Tomorrow appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/RFatmw7
via IFTTT

Trump To Participate In CNN Town Hall On May 10

Trump To Participate In CNN Town Hall On May 10

Former President Donald Trump is scheduled to participate in a May 10 presidential town hall hosted by CNN in New Hampshire, the network announced Monday.

Evan Vucci / AP / Shutterstock

“The event, hosted by ‘CNN This Morning’ anchor Kaitlan Collins and airing at 9 p.m. ET on May 10, will feature the former president taking questions from New Hampshire Republicans and undeclared voters who plan to vote in the 2024 GOP presidential primary,” reads a statement from the network.

CNN has a longstanding tradition of hosting leading presidential candidates for Town Halls and political events as a critical component of the network’s robust campaign coverage.”

The first of many?

According to the network: “This event with former President Trump will be the first of many for CNN in the coming months as CNN correspondents travel across the country to hear directly from voters in the runup to the 2024 presidential election.”

What’s up with Trump suddenly warming up to his ‘Fake News’ nemesis?

During his time in the White House, Trump often disparaged CNN as an “enemy of the people” and “fake news,” a phrase he repeated last month as he gloated over the network’s decision to fire morning anchor Don Lemon. “Good News: ‘The dumbest man on television,’ Don Lemon, has finally been fired from Fake News CNN. My only question is, WHAT TOOK THEM SO LONG?,” Trump said in a message posted to his Truth Social platform. “No wonder CNN’s ratings (MSNBC’s also) have gone down the tubes — and will stay there until they bring credibility back to the newsroom. Don’t hold your breath,” he added, repeating another of his favorite digs—that CNN’s ratings have collapsed.

Trump clearly will put his issues with the network aside as he continues his 2024 campaign for the Republican nomination. He’s made several trips to New Hampshire in recent weeks—the most recent just last week—and has made headlines lobbing insults at Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who’s expected to challenge Trump for the GOP nomination. –Forbes

Perhaps it’s because Fox just fired Trump-friendly host Tucker Carlson?

A senior Trump adviser told the Daily Caller‘s Henry Rodgers: “President Trump is running to be President for all Americans. Going outside the traditional Republican ‘comfort zone’ was a key to President Trump’s success in 2016. Some other candidates are too afraid to take this step in their quest to defeat Joe Biden, and are afraid to do anything other than Fox News. CNN executives made a compelling pitch.”

Will CNN ambush the former president with fake news (see: Matt Taibbi)?

 

Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/01/2023 – 17:40

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/bLtpHd0 Tyler Durden

California, New York, Illinois Biggest Losers Amid Exodus To Low-Tax States: IRS

California, New York, Illinois Biggest Losers Amid Exodus To Low-Tax States: IRS

Authored by Bill Pan via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The latest tax migration data from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) shows that the exodus of taxpayers from high-tax states continued from 2020 to 2021, with California, New York, and Illinois again suffering some of the nation’s biggest losses of people and money.

An aerial image shows the city skyline in San Francisco, Calif., on Jan. 20, 2023. (Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images)

California’s tax base shrank by nearly $29.1 billion as the Golden State saw a net loss of 332,000 taxpayers and their dependents during a time of widespread lockdowns, stay-at-home orders, and business closures, according to the IRS migration data released Thursday.

In second place was New York, which was hit by a net loss of $24.5 billion and 262,000 people. Illinois was third, with a net loss of $10.9 billion and 105,000 people. Other high-tax states such as Massachusetts ($2.6 billion) and New Jersey ($2.3 billion) also saw tens of thousands of people moving out during the period.

On the winning side, Florida reaped the benefits of the wealth migration more than any other state, enjoying a net gain of $39.1 billion in gross income from 256,000 new residents. Texas, which gained $10.9 billion and 175,000 people, came in second. They were followed by Nevada ($4.6 billion), North Carolina ($4.5 billion), Arizona ($4.4 billion), South Carolina ($4.2 billion), and Tennessee ($4.1 billion).

The data was compiled by comparing the mailing addresses on one year’s income tax return and that of the next. The most recent migration data reflects address changes that occurred between when taxpayers filed their tax year 2019 returns in calendar year 2020 and when they filed their tax year 2020 returns in calendar year 2021.

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, California had already seen a net outflow of people and money to other states. According to previous IRS data, California lost $8 billion in income in 2018 and $8.8 billion in 2019.

California still takes in more tax revenue than any other state due to its tax structure, which places higher rates on wealthy residents. Gov. Gavin Newsom announced last May that his state had a historic $97.5 billion budget surplus.

Read more here…

Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/01/2023 – 17:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/qjM9GRQ Tyler Durden

Joe Biden Wants 4 More Years ‘To Finish the Job.’ What Job?


Biden and Kamala announce re-election bid

In this week’s The Reason Roundtable, editors Matt Welch, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Nick Gillespie, and Peter Suderman puzzle over President Joe Biden’s announcement that he’s seeking reelection in 2024 and plod through the Republican-controlled House’s recently passed debt ceiling plan.

1:46: President Joe Biden announces he’s running again.

23:47: House Republicans pass a debt ceiling plan. Now what?

36:38: Weekly Listener Question

46:40: Revisionist history with Randi Weingarten

50:49: This week’s cultural recommendations

Mentioned in this podcast:

President Joe Biden Announces He Is Running for Reelection,” by Joe Lancaster

The Very Strange New Respect for Authoritarian Democrat Robert F. Kennedy Jr.,” by Matt Welch

Choose Between a Douche and a Turd…or Die (Special Get Out the Vote Edition),” by Nick Gillespie

Biden Has Added 220 Million Hours of Regulatory Paperwork Since His Inauguration,” by Mike Riggs

Kamala Harris Is a Flop,” by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

What We Talk About When We Talk About the Debt Ceiling,” by Nick Gillespie

3 Reasons Why the Debt-Ceiling Debate is Full of Malarkey,” by Nick Gillespie and Meredith Bragg

The Cult of the Presidency,” by Gene Healy

Don’t Believe the Media Fearmongering About Spending Cuts,” by Veronique de Rugy

The House GOP Debt Ceiling Plan Would Restore Spending Caps. Good.” by Eric Boehm

Kevin McCarthy, Joe Biden, and the Deeply Unserious Debate Over the Debt Ceiling,” by Eric Boehm

Randi Weingarten’s Hilariously Awful Media Rehabilitation Tour,” by Matt Welch

Reason‘s 1976 review of Bugsy Malone, by Charles Barr

Send your questions to roundtable@reason.com. Be sure to include your social media handle and the correct pronunciation of your name.

Today’s sponsors:

  • A famous mustache. Saturday Night Live sketches. A college professor who’s a Doja Cat fan. What do these three things have in common? They’re all part of the wild world of Jeopardy! The brand new podcast, This Is Jeopardy! The Story of America’s Favorite Quiz Show, peels back the curtain on the legacy of the show and takes you behind the scenes of the game that’s kept us guessing, laughing, and cheering for more than 60 years. Each week celebrates some favorite moments from Jeopardy!‘s history. It includes stories from contestants, staffers, and fans—from early days with Art Fleming, to the rise of Alex Trebek, to Ken Jennings’ historic run, and many more! Hosted by Buzzy Cohen, find and listen to episodes now wherever you get your podcasts.
  • Andrew Heaton is one of the funny people in Reason TV videos, like “Star Trek: The Libertarian Edition” or “Star Wars Libertarian Special.” So it won’t surprise you to discover he hosts a science fiction podcast: Alienating the AudienceAlienating the Audience does deep dives into science fiction, like Robert Heinlein’s free love libertarianism, the economics of Dune, Kurt Vonnegut and the warfare state, and how Star Wars: Andor loves public choice theory. Guests on the show have included Peter Boghossian on what first contact with aliens would be like, Jonathan Last from The Bulwark defending the Empire in Star Wars, Tim Sandefur of Goldwater Institute on Star Trek’s Cold War hot takes, and even Katherine Mangu-Ward has joined to discuss the work of Dan Simmons. If you don’t like science fiction, do not listen to Alienating the Audience, as there’s an excellent chance your virginity will grow back. But if you DO like science fiction, and with a dollop of politics and economics, served fresh by a mid-level comedian, then check out Alienating the Audience wherever you get your podcasts.

Audio production by Ian Keyser; assistant production by Hunt Beaty.

Music: “Angeline,” by The Brothers Steve

The post Joe Biden Wants 4 More Years 'To Finish the Job.' What Job? appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/z3AbXKi
via IFTTT

Chevron Matters — But Not as Much as You Might Think


Chevron

Today the Supreme Court decided to hear Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimando, a case that raises the prospect that the Court might overrule  Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, which requires federal judges to defer to administrative agencies’ interpretations of federal laws, so long as Congress has not addressed the issue in question, and the agency’s view is “reasonable.” Some legal commentators are, depending on their ideology, excited or appalled by the prospect that Chevron might be overruled. Advocates of reversal hope and critics fear that the result would be severe constraints on the power of federal regulatory agencies, and perhaps the administrative state generally.

While I would be happy to see Chevron overturned, I am skeptical of claims it will make a huge difference to the future of federal regulation. I explained why in two previous posts, (see here and here). To briefly summarize, my reasons for skepticism are 1) we often forget that the US had a large and powerful federal administrative state even before Chevron was decided in 1984, 2) states that have abolished Chevron-like judicial deference to administrative agencies (or never had it in the first place) don’t seem to have significantly weaker executive agencies or significantly lower levels of regulation, as a result, 3) a great deal of informal judicial deference to agencies is likely to continue, even in the absence of Chevron, and 4) Chevron sometimes protects deregulatory policies as well as those that increase regulation (it also sometimes protects various right-wing policies that increase regulation, in an age where pro-regulation  “national conservatives” are increasingly influential on the right); the Chevron decision itself protected a relatively deregulatory environmental policy by the Reagan administration.

Getting rid of Chevron is still worth doing, in my view. While it would impose only modest constraints on regulatory power, it could help protect the rule of law:

Ending Chevron deference would not gut the administrative state…. It would, however, have some important beneficial effects. It would put an end to what then-Judge—and future liberal Supreme Court justice—Stephen Breyer, writing in 1986, called an “abdication of judicial responsibility….”  The Constitution gives judges, not agency bureaucrats, the power to interpret federal law in cases that come before the courts….

The elimination of Chevron would also increase the stability of legal rules, and make it harder for administrations to play fast and loose with the law. As [Justice] Gorsuch pointed out in a well-known opinion he wrote as a lower court judge, Chevron deference often enables an agency to “reverse its current view 180 degrees anytime based merely on the shift of political winds and still prevail [in court].” When the meaning of federal law shifts with the political agendas of succeeding administrations, that makes a mockery of the rule of law and undermines the stability that businesses, state governments, and ordinary citizens depend on to organize their affairs.

Of course, reports of Chevron’s demise might well prove premature. I am skeptical there really are five votes on the Court to overrule Chevron completely. Assuming none of the liberal justices will support the idea, pushing it through would require five conservative votes. That’s true despite the fact that liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is recused from the case. A 4-4 split on the Court would not result in a binding precedent overturning Chevron, or—most likely—any kind of binding precedent at all.

I see little reason to think Chief Justice John Roberts leans towards reversal. The same goes for Justice Alito, who in 2018 chided the Court for failing to apply Chevron more rigorously. Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett might also prefer curbing Chevron to complete reversal. It’s hard to know for sure. Only Gorsuch and Thomas are clearly committed to reversal, and they need to add three votes to make it happen.

On balance, I believe Jonathan Adler is probably right to think the Court is more likely to further limit Chevron than to reverse it completely. But if I’m wrong about that and Chevron does go on the chopping block, the impact will not be as great as many might think.

Adler is also right to point out that Chevron rarely constrains the Supreme Court itself in recent years. They routinely refuse to defer to agencies, or even just ignore Chevron entirely. But the Chevron doctrine still matters much more in the lower courts, which is where the overwhelming majority of cases get decided. While it isn’t the key to the survival of the administrative state, it does give the executive branch incrementally broader discretion than it would enjoy otherwise.

 

 

The post Chevron Matters — But Not as Much as You Might Think appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/wN6fq58
via IFTTT

Yellen Warns Treasury To Run Out Of Cash As Soon As June 1 Absent Debt Ceiling Deal

Yellen Warns Treasury To Run Out Of Cash As Soon As June 1 Absent Debt Ceiling Deal

In a long-awaited update from Janet Yellen, shortly after the close, the Treasury Secretary sent a letter to Congress in which she said that as a result of the recent slowdown in tax receipts (extensively discussed here), the Treasury could run out of emergency debt-limit measures (i.e., hit the infamous X-Date) as soon as June 1 absent a debt-ceiling deal, a revision to her previous Jan 13 letter in which she said that it was “unlikely that cash and extraordinary measures would be exhausted before early June.” In other words, Congress has exactly one month to get a deal to raise the debt limit – which of course won’t happen without the market first plunging enough to prompt the extremely polarized chamber into action.

Here is the key part from the letter:

In my January 13 letter, I noted that it was unlikely that cash and extraordinary measures would be exhausted before early June. After reviewing recent federal tax receipts, our best estimate is that we will be unable to continue to satisfy all of the government’s obligations by early June, and potentially as early as June 1, if Congress does not raise or suspend the debt limit before that time. This estimate is based on currently available data, as federal receipts and outlays are inherently variable, and the actual date that Treasury exhausts extraordinary measures could be a number of weeks later than these estimates.

As a reminder, we have been tracking daily cumulative tax receipts which had fallen as much as 35% below last year’s levels…

… prompting banks to warn that a debt ceiling crunch could come far sooner than the expected X-date some time in late July/early August.

To be sure, Yellen admits that the X-date remains fluid, a function of the daily changes in tax receipts and outlays, and it is “impossible to predict with certainty the exact date when Treasury will be unable to pay the government’s bills” and Yellen will provide further updates to Congress in the coming weeks “as more information becomes available” but given the current projections, Yellen warns that “it is imperative that Congress act as soon as possible to increase or suspend the debt limit in a way that provides longer-term certainty that the government will continue to make its payments.”

Additionally, Yellen said that to avoid breaching the debt limit, the Treasury is suspending the issuance of State and Local Government Series (SLGS) Treasury securities: “SLGS are special-purpose Treasury securities issued to states and municipalities to help them comply with certain tax rules. When Treasury issues SLGS, they count against the debt limit.”

Such a move will deprive “state and local governments of an important tool to manage their finances”, which for a country that spends like a drunken sailor, is a move in the right direction.

Finally, as usual, Yellen ends by pleading with Congress to get a debt ceiling deal done as soon as possible:

We have learned from past debt limit impasses that waiting until the last minute to suspend or increase the debt limit can cause serious harm to business and consumer confidence, raise short-term borrowing costs for taxpayers, and negatively impact the credit rating of the United States. If Congress fails to increase the debt limit, it would cause severe hardship to American families, harm our global leadership position, and raise questions about our ability to defend our national security interests.

Needless to say, with the debt ceiling becoming the most controversial political topic and one which neither side is willing to compromise over, it is likely that nothing short of a market quake – similar to August 2011 – will be needed to prompt Congress into action.

Separately, earlier today, the Treasury published its latest debt borrowing estimates for the April – June 2023 and July – September 2023 quarters.

Source: Treasury

Starting with the historical data, the Treasury notes that during the first calendar quarter of 2023, Treasury borrowed $657 billion and ended the quarter with a cash balance of $178 billion. This is a huge difference from the forecast made just three months ago, in January 2023, when Treasury estimated borrowing of $932 billion and assumed an end-of-March cash balance of $500 billion, a forecast which was prevented due to the lack of a debt ceiling deal. The $275 billion difference in privately-held net market borrowing resulted primarily from the lower end-of-quarter cash balance, somewhat offset by lower net fiscal flows.

Looking ahead…

  • For the April – June 2023 quarter, Treasury expects to borrow $726 billion in new debt, assuming an end-of-June cash balance of $550 billion (up from the $178BN as of March 31).The borrowing estimate is $449 billion higher than announced in January 2023, primarily due to the lower beginning-of-quarter cash balance ($322 billion), and projections of lower receipts and higher outlays ($117 billion).
  • For the July – September 2023 quarter, Treasury expects to borrow another $733 billion in net debt, assuming an end-of-September cash balance of $600 billion.

Similar to last quarter, the April-June 2023 forecast is unlikely to pan out if either Yellen’s forecast for a June 1 X-date is wrong (as the debt ceiling would remain in place and no net increase in marketable borrowing securities would take place until a deal is completed), or if Congress fails to get a deal done even if the X-date is crossed and the US is forced to compartmentalize spending.

That said, a debt ceiling deal will get done eventually, even if it means a market crash to get Congress to move, and the longer new debt issuance is delayed, the bigger the eventual burst in new debt to hit the market as Treasury, which as of today is roughly $32 trillion if there was no temporary barrier on new debt issuance.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/01/2023 – 17:03

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/lm7AEPs Tyler Durden

China Is Back: Record 19.7 Million Railway Trips Made On First Day Of May Day Holiday As Retail Sales Soar 20%

China Is Back: Record 19.7 Million Railway Trips Made On First Day Of May Day Holiday As Retail Sales Soar 20%

China’s “zero covid” nightmare is now long forgotten, and the long-suffering local population is finally emerging from the ashes of home lockdowns and celebrating its freedom by traveling more than ever.

According to the China Railway Group, the country tourism and consumer activities rose sharply on the first day of the five-day Labor Day holiday, as residents rushed to travel and spend after three years of Covid-19 restrictions finally ended. As Bloomberg reports, some 19.7 million railway trips were made across the country on Saturday, the highest on record for a single day.

This is just the start: the railway operator expects traffic to jump to a record 120 million passengers for the extended holiday period, up 20% from the same period in 2019, before the pandemic struck.

Meanwhile, for those lamenting the lack of a Chinese economic rebound, just wait: shoppers were out in force on Saturday too, with major retail and catering companies seeing sales expand 21% from a year ago, according to Ministry of Commerce data cited by state broadcaster CCTV. Key food chains saw a 37% revenue boost, clothing sales climbed 21% while sales of jewellery, cigarettes and alcohol all rose 17%. The bottom line: China is not only traveling, it is spending, and the long-overdue economic bounce is about to hit with a vengeance.

According to Bloomberg, many residents are making their first trips since the pandemic after the authorities scrapped Covid-19 curbs in December, fuelling a rapid rebound in consumption and domestic tourism.

Why the surge in railroad transit? Because many young tourists are opting for low-cost, value-for-money experiences, with some unexpected destinations becoming the new hot spots.

In Beijing, where some of the strictest travel curbs were imposed during the pandemic, over 1.4 million trips were made in and out of the city’s railway stations on Saturday. That was a surge of 1,485% from 2022, and 27 per cent from 2019, according to the Beijing Municipal Commission of Transport.

Finally, flights coming in and out of Beijing also saw passenger numbers soar 1,594% from 2022, and 14% from 2019, one year before covid shut down the local economy.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/01/2023 – 16:40

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/6sxAlpZ Tyler Durden

Victor Davis Hanson: The Crazy Contours Of The Crazier 2024 Election

Victor Davis Hanson: The Crazy Contours Of The Crazier 2024 Election

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

We start with the likely American landscape over the next two years.

Joe Biden has no choice but to focus on a purely negative message. So we already know his talking points for the next 18 months: “ultra MAGA” demons, “semi-fascist” insurrectionists, Trump!, Trump!, Trump!, and more Trump!, murdering fellow Americans by putting limits on partial-birth and early abortions, “censorship” as banning critical race theory indoctrination and grooming books, inciting racial tribalism, along with the corollary old boilerplate triad of isms—“fascism, sexism, and racism!”

There will be no Democratic primary debates, even if support for Robert Kennedy, Jr. surges to 25-30 percent of the Democratic electorate. The latter is banking on his name, his gut instinct there are still some JFK-like Democrats and Independents in hiding, the decline of Joe Biden, and the pushback against all things woke.

Biden is failing at a geometric rate of enfeeblement and would likely not be able to rest up, medicate, and prep full-time to salvage the debates as he did as a candidate in the attenuated debate series of 2020. His handlers do not wish to tempt fate a third time and hope that if it comes to a Trump-Biden race that they can goad Trump into offering an excuse to curtail or cancel the debates entirely.

Why Stick with Biden?

So why does the Left stick with Biden, given his high negative ratings, the red-flag example of an enfeebled Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and a disabled Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.,), and his daily lapses of cognition, his inability to read off a teleprompter, his slurring of words to the point of incomprehensibility, his peculiar short-step, hands-out gait, and the indiscreet flashing of his paint-by-numbers, bold-letter prompt cards?

Does the Left not grasp that Biden is one additional bad fall on the steps of Air Force One from full disability, one sparkle-in-his-eye fixation on a young preteen girl in the audience that earns his eerie quips, blowing into the hair, and 20-seconds-too-long hug away from scandal? One complete freeze, in which he loses cognition and the ability to identify those in his immediate vicinity, away from total befuddlement?

Do they not appreciate that Biden is one crooked tax-document dump, one Hunter new-old email release, one burned and flipped former crony whistleblower away from special counsel/impeachment territory?

Do they not understand that the subtext of the current toxic inclusion of Hunter Biden on Air Force One, the shakedown pay for his nose-brush paintings, his new move into the White House, and his cue-card presence at the side of his bewildered dad are all a sort of implied familial blackmail by a prodigal son who believes he got dirty and decadent enriching the Biden clan–his father especially—and yet was never appreciated for his skullduggery?

We are watching a cornered Hunter reclaiming his due as first son. He seeks exemption from the walls-are-closing in law, and wishes to remind the Bidens at any moment he can take them all down with him. Keep your friends close, your family closer.

Nevertheless, the Left Unites

Still, despite the downsides, there are various reasons that explain why the Left unites behind the unpopular and flawed Biden, who is perhaps the least physically able, oldest, and most corrupt president in modern history.

One, the hard Left has learned that despite the obvious liability of a non-compos-mentis president, the advantages of outsourcing the main decision-making of his presidency to the hard Left—the new Democratic Party of Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, the squad, the recalibrated Obamas, the black caucus, and the wink and nod to Antifa and BLM—mark a rare moment in U.S.history.

A Jacobin crowd, whose agenda does not poll 50 percent on any issue, is now running the country. Joe Biden is its ancient, happy-face emoji. It has managed in two years to wreck the border, destroy energy autonomy, fuel racial tensions, create an entirely new cause of the aggrieved “transgender community,” tank the economy, spike crime, and put America into rapid decline abroad beneath the Biden façade—and call it all “progress.”

The wherewithal in lieu of popular support came from huge amounts of tech and corporate cash, and the fealty of most of our cultural institutions, from Silicon Valley and the media to the corporate boardroom, academia, K-12, professional sports, entertainment, and the weaponization of the federal bureaucracy including the FBI, Justice Department, Pentagon, CIA, and IRS.

In other words, for the Left having no president at all certainly has its advantages. No one in the Oval Office is warning the socialists, “You guys are crazy and will cost me the election if you keep it up!” Instead, with no one in charge, everyone is in charge.

Two, what choice is there?

The more Kamala Harris knows she must not cackle, must expand her vocabulary to 500 words, and must stop the endless Soak-Wash-Rinse-Spin repetitive cycle of Kahlil Gibran platitudes, the more she simply sticks to her one-trick shtick. No one knows whether on her prompt some aide composed such mush for her teleprompter, or she is freelancing, or if it even matters. Harris is the first vice president in memory whose liabilities prevent an accustomed presence at foreign dignitary funerals.

Three, the Left knows that the strategy of using the Biden veneer for an unpopular socialist agenda is dangerous. It risks Biden’s minute-by-minute octogenarian fragility and, in his vacuum, too much visibility to the absurd people who now surface to lecture the nation on a future of battery-operated tanks, “secure” borders of 6.5 million illegal entries, racist clover-leaves and overpasses, and Dylan Mulvaney’s heroics.

Given all that, the 2024 Democrat campaign in default style has pivoted also to lawfare.

If Alvin Bragg, Letitia James, Fani Willis, Jack Smith, and E. Jean Carroll can stagger their indictments and lawsuits, egg Trump to keep posting on social media, prepare all sorts of gag orders, stays, delays, hearings, and consultations that require Trump to appear in court in chronic fashion, then they believe they can win him just enough empathy to take the Republican nomination, but by November create enough nationwide exhaustion that Independents, Rhinos, and some shaky Trump supporters stay home with a sigh that they “can’t take it anymore.”

So the Left’s strategy seems to be that a few provocative early cuts will create enough blood to excite sympathy and enlist first aid, but subsequent hundreds of cumulative wounds leave such a bloody scene that supporters will recoil, certain either that the victim is terminal or the effort to resuscitate him too messy.

The Republican Strategy

As far as the Republicans, no one knows anything at this early stage and those who say they do know even less.

We forget that in May and June of 2015, we were variously lectured that Jeb! was the Bush who should have been president, that Chris Christie was the sort of blue-state governor that could win nationally, that it was time for Marco Rubio to meet his destiny, that a can-do Rick Perry of 2012 in 2016 would bring Texas know-how to the White House, that Ben Carson was the real outsider we’ve been waiting for, that Ted Cruz alone could unite the anti-Trump vote to rescue the nomination, that Mike Huckabee’s 2012 bid was a just a run-up for his 2016 surge, that the perfect governor Scott Walker had all but locked up on the nomination—and that Trump was a supposed buffoon with zero chance of being nominated and less than zero of being elected.

When Trump currently cuts commercials focusing on the Biden catastrophic record, when he gives televised interviews in which he outlines his solutions to the current self-created messes, and when he omits reference to the “stop-the-steal” past and focuses on 2024, he wins.

And when he detours from comparing his record and agenda to Biden’s and instead replays all the terrible injustices done him (and there were plenty) and goes full bore into ad hominem personal attacks against DeSantis and his sterling record in Florida, he loses the very constituencies he and other Republicans need to win—suburbanites, independents, Democrats terrified of cancel culture, and a few stray rhinos embarrassed by their past nihilistic votes for Biden.

The strange thing is that Trump knows this paradox better than anyone, and seems happy and content when he keeps to his record and future solutions, and morose and moody when he replays the past with himself as the central character rather than the suffering country.

The Democrats fear Ron DeSantis more, evident by the Left’s strange occasional praise of Trump and the latter’s own even stranger attacks from the Left on the Florida governor on abortion, Social Security, the Florida response to COVID, and the repeal of the ossified, crony-capitalist special exemptions for a now woke Disney. The Left’s operative strategy apparently is that it believes Trump customarily gets mad, but DeSantis even more dangerously gets even.

Still, the Left viscerally hates Trump more than it despises DeSantis. It knows the present pro-Trump strategy is risky, since, in 2016, that gambit gave a billion dollars in free media to Trump, only to see him win the Electoral College over a flawed candidate but perhaps even less flawed than Biden. It rationally knows that risk, but emotionally knows it cannot stop taking it.

Lots of candidates may jump into the race, either as vice presidential hopefuls, or hoping that DeSantis proves a Scott Walker, the great Governor hope, who nearly turned a purple state red, took on the right enemies, got reelected, had data and policy at his fingertips—and strangely fizzled out in the first debates.

In contrast, the apparent DeSantis strategy is to declare in mid-May to late June, as the Biden record becomes more depressing, as the Trump legal morass grows and empathy fades, and the more Trump attacks him, the more an above-the-fray DeSantis talks about his record and agenda and creeps back in the polls.

All of the parameters above may be what is known so far. Far greater are the known unknowns of the next year and a half.

If we hit full stagflation with more bank collapses, higher interest, soaring energy prices, and a scary expansion of the slugfest in Ukraine, then all the Democratic strategies in the world will not prevent Biden’s Cartesque fate.

Will Biden manage to simulate a presidency or continue to scare even his supporters? Which, if any, of the four or five legal attacks on Trump will stick, and if so, when, why, and how? And how will DeSantis do with crowds, rallies, and messy spars?

Again, the only thing that is now known is what is possible. What everyone now thinks is certain is likely unlikely. The 2024 race is not predetermined but more fluid than ever.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/01/2023 – 16:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/CQgDOr9 Tyler Durden

Chelsea Clinton Comes Out In Favor Of Porn For School Kids

Chelsea Clinton Comes Out In Favor Of Porn For School Kids

Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

Emma McIntyre/Variety via Getty Images/Twitter Screenshot

Bill and Hillary Clinton’s daughter Chelsea Clinton appears to have taken on a new activism project, defending attempts to force kids as young as Kindergarten age to be exposed to sexually explicit “LGBTQ+” material at school.

Clinton tweeted the following post, claiming that Republicans are trying to “ban” books and that it is harmful to children to remove material with LGBTQ+ “themes”.

As we have exhaustively covered, the truth is that no one is calling for the books to be banned, but many are calling for the books that contain pornographic images and even pedophilia themes, as well as unscientific statements about biological gender, to be removed from school libraries.

This material is not age appropriate for children.

Time for Chelsea Clinton to face some facts:

Related:

*  *  *

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

ALERT! In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here.

Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, we urgently need your financial support here.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/01/2023 – 15:50

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/kx0dAiz Tyler Durden

Cert Grants With Recusals

Last week, the Supreme Court released a Statement of Ethics Principles and Practices. One of the rationales for not adopting the Conduct of Conduct, in its entirety, concerns recusals.

In regard to recusal, the Justices follow the same general principles and statutory standards as other federal judges, but the application of those principles can differ due to the unique institutional setting of the Court. In some instances the Justices’ recusal standards are more restrictive than those in the lower court Code or the statute—for example, concluding that recusal is appropriate where family members served as lead counsel below. A recusal consideration uniquely present for Justices is the impairment of a full court in the event that one or more members withdraws from a case. Lower courts can freely substitute one district or circuit judge for another. The Supreme Court consists of nine Members who always sit together. Thus, Justices have a duty to sit that precludes withdrawal from a case as a matter of convenience or simply to avoid controversy.

I think this reasoning is persuasive, and explains why a different set of recusal rules should apply to the Supreme Court. There are only nine Justices, and the Court should decide cases with all members, where possible.

That principle brings me to today’s order list. The Supreme Court granted cert in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimando. Jon Adler explained that this case may overrule, or at least narrow the Chevron doctrine. However, the Court will be shorthanded. Justice Jackson recused herself. She participated in oral argument in this case during her ever-so-brief stint on the D.C. Circuit.

This recusal raise an obvious question: why grant this case which would be decided by an eight-member Court? The Court has been deluged by petitions seeking to overrule Chevron. Maybe there are specific rationales to favor this petition. Paul Clement, super lawyer, is counsel of record. And perhaps Clement highlighted the second question presented in an artful way, that gives the Court space to operate:

Whether the Court should overrule Chevron or at least clarify that statutory silence concerning controversial powers expressly but narrowly granted elsewhere in the statute does not constitute an ambiguity requiring deference to the agency.

Moreover, this case has “good facts.” Modest fisherman were required to pay the salaries of inspectors on their small boats. I love this quote from the cert petition:

The framing generation was vexed enough by being forced to quarter British soldiers, see U.S. Const. amend. III, but not even the British forced the unlucky homeowner to personally pay the redcoat’s salary.

Perhaps these confluence of facts caused the Justices to grant this particular petition, knowing that Jackson was recused. Or, perhaps, the Justices who voted to grant did not care that Jackson would be excused. If the latter analysis is true, then the concerns in the Statement of Ethics Principles and Practices rings hollow. The Justices could have granted any other case calling to overrule Chevron and cribbed Clement’s question presented. But they chose this case, where it will be very hard to count to five to keep Chevron in its current form.

The post Cert Grants With Recusals appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/buNTcU9
via IFTTT