Andrew Restad

Justice Jackson argues that sticking to the 32-day default rule is necessary to avoid the appearance of partiality. Alito correctly identifies this as a tactic to run out the clock on the 2026 election cycle. She claims the Court’s decision creates chaos because the primary process had already started… ballots were already in the mail. This hypersensitivity to "chaos" masks a desire to maintain a gerrymandered status quo that her ideological allies find useful. She accuses the majority of letting principles give way to power. It’s a groundless and irresponsible charge meant to shame the Court for actually enforcing the Constitution. She wants the Court to stay in the business of racial sorting because a world where race and politics are disentangled threatens the leftist grip on redistricting as a tool for power. Her position is an explicit rejection of the principle that the Constitution is color-blind.

Justice Alito fires back at Justice Jackson, calling her solo dissent "baseless and insulting" and "utterly irresponsible" after she accused the majority of abandoning principle for power.

As I have said since these hostilities with Iran began, the President’s authority as Commander-in-Chief is not without limits. The Constitution gives Congress an essential role in decisions of war and peace, and the War Powers Act establishes a clear 60-day deadline for Congress to either authorize or end U.S. involvement in foreign hostilities. That deadline is not a suggestion; it is a requirement. Our military has performed magnificently and with great courage and sacrifice in diminishing the threat that Iran poses to our country, our allies, the broader Middle East, and the world. Further military action against Iran must have a clear mission, achievable goals, and a defined strategy for bringing the conflict to a close. I voted to end the continuation of these military hostilities at this time until such a case is made.

MA: 36% Republican, 0 seats CT: 42% Republican, 0 seats ME: 46% Republican, 0 seats NM: 46% Republican, 0 seats NH: 48% Republican, 0 seats RI: 42% Republican, 0 seats VT: 32% Republican, 0 seats HI: 37% Republican, 0 seats DE: 42% Republican, 0 seats Hello, Gerrymandering.

Dear Democrats whining about Democracy: please explain to America how, out of 21 Congressional seats representing the 6 New England states, there are ZERO Republican Representatives, even though 40% of the electorate are registered Republicans, 48% in New Hampshire alone?

Democrat James Talarico posted this in 2012: “Looking forward to spending my birthday with the 6th grade boys…” No teacher, let alone a U.S. Senate candidate, should ever post that.

Must be exhausting to be for gerrymandering one week and against it the next.