jesse

7.1K posts

jesse banner
jesse

jesse

@jessetripathi

Union lawyer. past - @seiu, @unitehere19, @yalelawsch, @tuftsuniversity, political campaigns, worker organizing

Washington, DC เข้าร่วม Haziran 2013
1.2K กำลังติดตาม641 ผู้ติดตาม
jesse รีทวีตแล้ว
Mychael Schnell
Mychael Schnell@mychaelschnell·
NEW: Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas just walked through the House side of the Capitol. He didn’t say why he was here. But told me he was meeting with “nobody.” I said tomorrow will be a big day at the court. “I guess so,” he responded. Would he give a sneak peak of decisions? “Nope,” he told me with a chuckle.
English
1.3K
1.6K
9.1K
4.7M
jesse
jesse@jessetripathi·
@pfoeller i am saying that ignoring the universal public acceptance of Bolling as a good and important thing, its 70 years of unquestioned adherence in courts and congress, the lack of any attempt to amend the const. in response, its workability, reliance, and moral weight is deranged, yes
English
1
0
0
11
Paul Foeller
Paul Foeller@pfoeller·
@jessetripathi If your position is simply that Bolling's reliance interests outweigh correcting the error, that's a perfectly serious argument. But then we're arguing about how much weight to give stare decisis, not whether Thomas is "deranged." The label is doing work the argument isn't.
English
1
0
0
20
Paul Foeller
Paul Foeller@pfoeller·
The problem with a lot of Clarence Thomas discourse is that people collapse “this would produce bad policy outcomes” into “this cannot be what the Constitution says.” Those are different questions. A lot of good policy outcomes do not find their grounding in the Constitution.
jesse@jessetripathi

clarence thomas is legitimately deranged

English
1
0
0
112
jesse รีทวีตแล้ว
Acyn
Acyn@Acyn·
Karl: Josh Gottheimer, a Democratic member of Congress, who says, “Many of us believe, as do I, if you’re a socialist, you are not a Democrat.” And in fact, they put out a manifesto today. Mamdani: Sounds pretty socialist to me…. I'm not interested in writing a manifesto or frankly, in reading one. I'm interested in delivering. And that's exactly what we've been showing.
English
233
2.1K
29.2K
3.7M
jesse
jesse@jessetripathi·
@pfoeller i dont think that an academic disagreement about Bolling is deranged. What is deranged is that he wants to overrule Bolling! And my whole point is that, outside of his interpretive disagreement, he has no good reason for doing so. And even you agree that there should be more
English
1
0
0
19
Paul Foeller
Paul Foeller@pfoeller·
@jessetripathi Which brings us back to where we started. Reliance interests, institutional stability, and public acceptance are all strong arguments for not overruling Bolling. They're not arguments that someone is "deranged" for thinking Bolling got the Constitution wrong in the first place.
English
1
0
0
20
jesse
jesse@jessetripathi·
@pfoeller put another way, if the question is as simple as "what does the text explicitly say," how was it lawful for Congress to create the Air Force?
jesse tweet media
English
0
0
0
8
jesse
jesse@jessetripathi·
@pfoeller You'd be right if Bolling said "5A says the words equal protection." It didn't! It had to determine what "due process" means. That 14A includes due process and equal protection is an *argument* about how to interpret 5A. Bolling even said 14A protections may differ from 5A
English
2
0
0
20
jesse
jesse@jessetripathi·
i love the VAR offsides debates. you can dislike the delay VAR causes or that it changes the vibe, but these other arguments are so silly. "meaningless foot placement" determines offsides with or w/out VAR!
Justin Macmahan@JustinMacmahan

It’s simply too hard to score goals to have so many randomly invalidated due to meaningless foot placement. I mean this is completely undetectable to the human eye and has zero bearing on the play. Technology has ruined this game

English
0
0
0
70
jesse
jesse@jessetripathi·
@pfoeller and because those factors don't exist, it is deranged to want to undo a bedrock principle of constitutional law (that no one argues is either bad or unaccepted by the public)
English
1
0
0
19
jesse
jesse@jessetripathi·
@pfoeller thomas can say that it's not a legitimate reading of the constitution, but that's just another way of saying he disagrees! i still don't understand what factors, other than his difference in interpretive theory and application, justifies overruling
English
1
0
0
19
jesse
jesse@jessetripathi·
@pfoeller which is why they look to specific factors that would justify overruling prior decisions. if prior supreme courts are just as legitimate as today's, there needs to be something more than just disagreement about "what the people chose"
English
1
0
0
19
jesse
jesse@jessetripathi·
@pfoeller you're missing my point. the bolling court already decided what they think the people chose in the constitution. so it's not that precedent > "correct" interpretation, its (one legitimate interpretation + 70 years of widespread acceptance) > a different legitimate interpretation
English
1
0
0
19
jesse รีทวีตแล้ว
Robert Sterling
Robert Sterling@RobertMSterling·
Mamdani is a generational political talent. The energy he brings to local retail politics is unlike anything I’ve ever seen. I can’t stand the guy—he’s going to be the downfall of New York, and his movement might destroy America itself—but we ignore his gifts at our own peril.
Robert Sterling tweet media
New York Post@nypost

Zohran Mamdani jumps into NYC pool to kick off summer tradition - while violating dress code rules trib.al/IAWnZtX

English
553
126
2.6K
1.3M
jesse
jesse@jessetripathi·
@dilanesper idk jimmy esq started by calling him full of shit
English
0
0
2
32
jesse
jesse@jessetripathi·
@pfoeller And it's more democratic - the people can't weigh in if it keeps changing. Idk where the line is, but factors include: length of time, widespread acceptance, workability, consequences/injustice, degree of error. none apply here except the last one (tho I'd disagree)
English
1
0
0
23
Paul Foeller
Paul Foeller@pfoeller·
@jessetripathi Your theory seems to tolerate preserving a judicial interpretation that you believe is constitutionally incorrect because of institutional values like stability and reliance. My question is simply where you draw that line
English
1
0
0
22

ค้นพบ

@pfoeller @MattZeitlin @dilanesper @elonmusk @BarackObama @taylorswift13 @cristiano @BillGates