This is a ridiculous way to characterize John Cornyn in 2026. His primary ads are just as bigoted as the worst of them, and his boast that he votes with Trump 99% of the time is hardly a "kinder and gentler" message: Alex Pretti, Renee Good, and many others are dead bc of his sycophantic votes.
Morons
Morons are in charge
www.nytimes.com/2026/02/14/u...
Jackie Robinson was a passionate advocate for social and racial equality, and the Dodgers going to the White House again would be incompatible with his legacy.
www.latimes.com/sports/dodge...
❤️
BREAKING: MN Bureau of Criminal Apprehension & Hennepin DA file fed lawsuit dmeanding immediate access to federal evidence in DHS agent's deadly shooting of observer during immigration enforcement operation Sat. Doc: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us... Earlier: www.politico.com/news/2026/01...
Congratulations to Brett Kavanaugh bsky.app/profile/ajco...
It would take a two-word amendment to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to subject ICE agents and other federal law enforcement officers to the same liability for constitutional violations that local and state officers currently face.
If Congress actually cared about what it's seeing, it could pass that overnight.
This is literally what they do whenever a Black person is killed by police. No matter how solid the evidence is, they will keep pushing that lie, not just to poison the conversation and make sure the killer walks free, but to reassert the political idea that these people deserve to be killed.
NYT provides no evidence here, probably because the claim is flatly untrue. See eg recent Pew data, or many posts on the subject from @gelliottmorris.com this year
www.nytimes.com/2025/12/23/u...
Is calling the half of the country that opposes you "bad people" and vowing to use the military power of the state to crush them "doing politics the right way"? I mean, he is up there saying words, trying to persuade!
Our team is headed to court today to challenge the Trump-Vance admin’s attempts to block Members of Congress from checking on conditions at ICE detention facilities.
ICE cannot be allowed to operate in the dark.
This is absolutely true. If the NYT covered this the way they covered trans care, you all would finally understand what dangerous shit their trans care coverage has been.
The president is sending the military to control American cities and if you're a reporter who's framing that illegal power grab as "pushing the boundaries of constitutionality" or "acting boldly to fight crime" or whatever, please go find another line of work where you won't get us all killed.
Xinis: It has been reported to the criminal court in TN that Mr. Abrego is being deported to Uganda because he exercised his right to trial as opposed to pleading guilty to criminal charges...In my view cannot do that, cannot condition relinquishment of constitutional rights in that regard.
“Seeking friendlier data”? Seriously, NYT?
To Supreme Court clerk from Ken Paxton office: precedent is clear that a "quo warranto" proceeding "can only be brought by the attorney general, a county attorney, or a district attorney." In re Dallas County, 697 S.W.3d 142, 152 (Tex. 2024) (orig. proceeding) (citation omitted). Further, the Constitution charges "the Attorney General" with the obligation "to represent the State in all suits and pleas in the Supreme Court of the State in which the State may be a party." Tex. Const. art. IV, § 22. A writ of quo warranto, moreover, "is the exclusive legal remedy afforded to the public by which it may protect itself against the usurpation or unlawful occupancy of a public office by an illegal occupancy." Hamman v. Hayes, 391 S.W.2d 73, 74 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 1965, writ ref'd) (citations omitted) (emphasis added). The Speaker of the House has issued arrest warrants for truant members of the Texas House who have absconded to other states in order to compel their attendance at the ongoing special session. See In re Abbott, 628 S.W.3d 288, 292-98 (Tex. 2021) (orig. proceeding). The Speaker has set a Friday, August 8 deadline for those absent members to return to the Capitol. If those absent members do not comply with the Speaker's deadline, the Attorney General intends to pursue all available judicial remedies, including those available through a quo warranto proceeding to declare the truant Legislators' offices vacant on grounds of abandonment. As a result, the Court Post Office Box 12548, Austin, Texas 78711-2548 • (512) 463-2100 • www.texasattorneygeneral.gov Page 2 should not dismiss the Governor's petition until the Speaker's Friday deadline passes and the Attorney General can be heard on these weighty issues.
Response from Abbott: I write briefly to clarify the Court's jurisdiction in this matter. The petition invoking this Court's original jurisdiction filed today by the Governor does not proceed under Chapter 66 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, the provisions being discussed in In re Dallas County, 697 S.W.3d 142 (Tex. 2024). As this Court is aware, it has adjudicated on the merits writs of quo warranto in proceedings brought under this Court's original jurisdiction-independent of its appellate jurisdiction, the only head of jurisdiction that could possibly lie from proceedings under Chapter 66. See, e.g., State ex rel. Angelini v. Hardberger, 932 S.W.2d 489 (Tex. 1996); TEX. R. APP. PROC. 52.1. The Governor is not seeking to proceed under Chapter 66. As noted in the filing submitted today, the Governor seeks relief under Article V, Section 3 of the Texas Constitution and Section 22.002(a) of the Texas Government Code-as clearly expressed in the petition. See Emergency Pet. 1. As explained in the petition, at least 500 years of common law and more recent Texas Supreme Court precedent make clear that quo warranto proceedings may be initiated by relators other than the Attorney General. Id. at 13-15. As the Relator in this case, Governor Abbott continues to respectively request that this Court rule before House Democrats deny the Legislature a quorum for the third time. POST OFFICE BOX 12428 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 512-463-2000 (VOICE) DIAL 7-1-1 FOR RELAY SERVICES
I not sure that publicly fighting with your own Attorney General on the state Supreme Court docket is a winning litigation strategy but hey what do I know
The Columbia settlement is an “astonishing transfer of autonomy and authority to . . . an administration whose disdain for the values of the academy is demonstrated anew every day.” New @knightcolumbia.org analysis of the Columbia settlement, just published. knightcolumbia.org/blog/what-th...
that is one way to describe a white supremacist, politico!!!
After Texas failed to pass a bill to improve flood warning systems, a Kerr County lawmaker says he likely would vote differently now on House Bill 13, which aimed to establish a grant program for counties to build new emergency communication infrastructure.
bit.ly/44xMjyr
“The New York Times collaborated with a white nationalist eugenicist hacker and agreed to keep his identity a secret to publish a Zohran Mamdani hit piece” is a way bigger story than “18 year old Zohran Mamdani ticked ‘African American’ on his Columbia application because he was a citizen of Uganda”
at least he didn't do something truly reckless like try to forgive student loans
![The majority’s contention that I reject “ ‘pure textualism’ [a]s insufficiently pliable to secure the result [I] seek,” ante, at 10, stems from an
unfortunate misunderstanding of the judicial role. Our interpretative
task is not to seek our own desired results (whatever they may be). And,
indeed, it is precisely because of this solemn duty that, in my view, it is
imperative that we interpret statutes consistent with all relevant indicia
of what Congress wanted, as best we can ascertain its intent. A methodology that includes consideration of Congress’s aims does exactly that—
and no more. By contrast, pure textualism’s refusal to try to understand
the text of a statute in the larger context of what Congress sought to
achieve turns the interpretive task into a potent weapon for advancing
judicial policy preferences. By “finding” answers in ambiguous text, and
not bothering to consider whether those answers align with other sources
of statutory meaning, pure textualists can easily disguise their own preferences as “textual” inevitabilities. So, really, far from being “insufficiently pliable,” I think pure textualism is incessantly malleable—that’s
its primary problem—and, indeed, it is certainly somehow always flexible enough to secure the majority’s desired outcome.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreih3qdtlloz3yhggypbtwiveqdgzzfgapsnetvq7qsni7wfmyuovoi)
The majority’s contention that I reject “ ‘pure textualism’ [a]s insufficiently pliable to secure the result [I] seek,” ante, at 10, stems from an unfortunate misunderstanding of the judicial role. Our interpretative task is not to seek our own desired results (whatever they may be). And, indeed, it is precisely because of this solemn duty that, in my view, it is imperative that we interpret statutes consistent with all relevant indicia of what Congress wanted, as best we can ascertain its intent. A methodology that includes consideration of Congress’s aims does exactly that— and no more. By contrast, pure textualism’s refusal to try to understand the text of a statute in the larger context of what Congress sought to achieve turns the interpretive task into a potent weapon for advancing judicial policy preferences. By “finding” answers in ambiguous text, and not bothering to consider whether those answers align with other sources of statutory meaning, pure textualists can easily disguise their own preferences as “textual” inevitabilities. So, really, far from being “insufficiently pliable,” I think pure textualism is incessantly malleable—that’s its primary problem—and, indeed, it is certainly somehow always flexible enough to secure the majority’s desired outcome.
Justice Jackson taking on Gorsuch's "pure textualism" and arguing for a more holistic reading of Congress' handiwork—worth reading in full. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...
Me literally holding up my water glass and saying “SALUD!”.
@carbajal.house.gov
Really Cool how nobody wanted to take this shit seriously
www.nytimes.com/live/2025/06...
The Trump administration sued Texas yesterday in a single-judge division in a suit that took just over six hours to produce a final judgment blocking a Texas state law.
If that sounds fishy (and beneath the dignity of the federal courts) to you, it’s because it is.
Me in today’s bonus “One First”:
Trump’s EPA aims to roll back 30+ environmental rules.
AP’s analysis:
➡️ +25,000 deaths a year
➡️ +2.8B tons CO₂ by 2035
➡️ Billions in lost health benefits
The cost of reversing science-backed protections is deadly. Read the full AP story: buff.ly/WVyuJHU #SaveEPA
We're hiring!
www.aclu.org/careers/appl...
The Secretary of Homeland Security, ladies and gentlemen.
