(I wasn’t going to do one today, with the High Holy Days of American Idolatry and all, but since I couldn’t sleep last night with all the rowdishness, might as well write ‘er up.)
SUPREME COURT RULES PRESIDENTS HAVE BROAD IMMUNITY
I’m not a lawyer, so this is my uniformed opinion. I did read pieces of the decision, and for me, it seems like it’s not what either camp are screaming about. It says that Presidents have immunity for official acts, and that they don’t have immunity for unofficial acts.
So,
A) No, they didn’t say Trump was immune to do whatever he wanted (or any president). He was not “TOTALLY EXONERATED,” no matter how many times he says it or how many CAPS LOCK keys are sacrificed.
And B) they didn’t say Trump was vindicated or found innocent. He was not “TOTALLY EXONERATED,” no matter how many times he says it or how many CAPS LOCK keys are sacrificed. They did say his discussions with the Justice Department are off limits, and there’s some gray area regarding conversations with Pence about delaying the certification of the election
It seems to me that what they said was “it’s up to the prosecution here to prove that what Trump did was NOT part of his official duties.” That might be tough to do of course, but I think that’s a far cry from saying President can do whatever they want.
In Trump’s case, it also doesn’t affect his hush money trial (a private matter), his sexual assault case (again, private civil matter), or his documents case (which happened after he left office), and other allegations will have to be parsed as well. And his attorney was just disbarred in New York for lying about the election results, so I would guess that will come up in future cases.
Note too that members of Congress have already started floating the idea of a constitutional amendment to clarify a President’s powers. In the end, that might be the best thing, if people can find a reasonable compromise and clearly define that role.
In the end, the biggest outcome here so far is that it’s virtually guaranteed that Trump will not face consequences for his multiple legal issues until after the November election. And then who knows
CALLS FOR BIDEN TO DROP OUT OF RACE
I don’t think anyone, not even Biden, had positive things to say about his debate performance. His campaign has offered a variety of excuses, from being ill to exhaustion. All well and good, though pretty unconvincing.
The one I find most likely (other than, you know, being really old) is that Trump’s continuous stream of non-sequiturs and lies (or not answering questions at all) makes it hard to focus on the point his opponent is trying to make. When someone just keeps throwing out garbage with a fire hose, it’s hard to know where to start. I know it would fluster me, and it’s completely inappropriate for a debate. But that said, if Biden wants to be able to lead the country, he’s still gotta be able to handle Trump. He didn’t.
In any case, there are rumors that members of his own team have floated the idea of him dropping out, and even some supporters have suggested that it would be best for America if a younger, more dynamic person took over. So far, Biden has reiterated that he has no plans of stepping aside.
For myself, since as I’ve said, at this point I’m not voting for either Trump or Biden, I don’t much care if he drops out or not. Perhaps if he did and the Democrats nominated someone I could support, maybe that would make a difference, i don’t know. As far as dropping out, I think if either of these two really cared about America, they would both be dropping out and supporting other candidates. Trump is clearly self-centered, and Biden, in my opinion, either thinks he’s the only one who can stop Trump, or is unable to admit that the game might be over. Both care way more about themselves (or are delusional) than they do about the country.
#kev2024
OTHER SUPREME COURT RULINGS
The Supreme Court was busy the last few weeks, so just to highlight a few notes:
- Justice Barret, one of the three “conservative” justices appointed by Trump, has angered some on the right by not consistently voting with the conservative majority. Some of the conservative media outlets have started referring to her as “Amy Commie Barrett.” To me, the fact that she seems not beholden to one particular political ideology is a good sign.
- Weakening the federal bureaucracy.
In multiple rulings (3 to my knowledge), the Supreme Court weakened the power of the federal government, a move that has been a dream of conservatives. These include the idea of the “Chevron” ruling, which allowed federal agencies to use their own expertise to interpret laws. Basically, since Reagan, the idea has been that the agencies can interpret ambiguous laws – now the Supreme Court has ruled judges will interpret. Essentially, the Judicial Branch taking more power for itself.
Additionally, the Justices ruled that agencies like the SEC can no longer have in-house tribunals to levy fines/etc. Again, the idea is that Congress told, for example, the EPA “We assign you to make sure we have clean water and air.” And the EPA then did its own investigations and levied penalties. The Supreme Court now says those people and organizations that are investigated have the right to a jury trial. This has repercussions throughout hundreds of federal agencies, and I think no one is really sure how far-reaching this is. At the very least, it will make it hard for the next president, be it Biden or Trump or whoever, from some of the executive actions of the last couple decades.
The conservatives celebrating this are a little questionable to me. Essentially, I grew up hearing how bad it was that the Courts had all this power. Now the courts are taking MORE power for themselves, and conservatives are cheering. It seems to me they are a) only thinking this will restrict Biden without realizing it will restrict other presidents as well, and b) just assume if “Trump judges” ruled this way, that must be the right way. - Rulings On Jan 6 defendents
Again, not a lawyer, but what I got from this is that people from the January 6 riot cannot be charged with obstruction ALONE. That is, if that is the only charge, it can’t be applied. To my understanding, they ruled that obstruction charges are related to destroying evidence or restricting law enforcement in an investigation, not in obstructing a government function. There are over 1000 people being charged with various crimes from Jan 6, and I think this only applies to 25 of them. So, it’s significant, but not “total exoneration” that some in the media are claiming. - Blocked a ban on mifepristone. The “abortion pill” decision was more a kick-the-can-down-the-road, but for now, they did not make the pill illegal.
- Overall, while the court ruled very conservative-heavy, to my mind it’s not all that surprising. There have been a slew of liberal-leaning decisions over the last few years, and it makes sense to me, long-term, that there is a conservative swing for a time.
SPOTTED OWL VS BARRED OWLS
This is a new one for me, and I just had to share it.
For a long time, the spotted owl has been one of the most well-known species on the endangered species list. There have been fairly famous efforts aimed at saving their forests, which are primarily in the Pacific Northwest, in order to prevent the species from going extinct.
Unfortunately, another species of owl is now moving into that same territory. The barred owl, which is from the East coast, has been moving into the spotted owl’s neighborhood over the last few years. So, conservationists have a new plan to save Spot:
Kill the Barred Owls.
That’s right my friends. The plan is to hire “trained shooters” to hunt down about 450,000 (yep, about half a million) barred owls to save the spotted owl.
Obviously, the idea of targeting one species in order to save another is somewhat controversial. Yet not unheard of. Apparently a similar strategy was used to save the West Coast salmon by shooting sea lions.
I guess my main point is – if you’re an owl hunter, get your resume ready.
IMMIGRATION NOTES
The US has deported 113 Chinese immigrants back to China, on the first “large” flight in over 5 years. Sending illegal immigrants back to China has been difficult because China has been reluctant to allow them to accept them, but the Chinese government has ramped up its efforts to halt illegal immigration, and has started working with the US more. I guess it’s a positive for countries to be working together, but it still doesn’t sit well with me.
In other immigration news, the US has agreed to allow roughly 300,000 Haitians to remain in the US, due to the ongoing violence in Haiti. Their work permits were set to expire, and the BIden administration extended their visas until February 2026.
Kev note: my support for immigration is well known, but I also understand the need for vetting immigrants. My stance is still that we need to be spending more money on staffing for processing immigrants rather than working to reduce the number. So, in this case, I’m in favor of the Haitian extension, and somewhat disappointed in the Chinese decision, though to my limited understanding there was some concern with human trafficking in those cases, which of course I oppose. Overall, Biden’s administration has been an improvement over Trump, but still pretty disappointing to me.
ISRAEL DRAFT LAW LEADS TO RIOTS
Last week, in an effort to boost recruitment for the ongoing war in Gaza, the Israeli government decided that ultra-orthodox Jewish men would no longer be exempt from the draft. Until now, students at yeshiva (think of it like a seminary for the Jewish faith) were exempt from the mandatory military service in Israel. That is no longer the case, and has lead to violent protests.
I mention this because I think it highlights something I think Americans confuse – the Israeli government is NOT the same as the Jewish faith. In this case, the ultra-orthodox Jewish believers are being forced into military service by the state, against their religious beliefs. I think the convergence of faith and politics in Israel is easy for American Christians, especially my conservative friends, to mix up.
I would also say, note that when push comes to shove, freedom of religion tends to take a back seat to political needs. Might be worth thinking through a little bit given the growing mix of politics and religion in the US
LABOUR PARTY WINS LANDSLIDE IN UK ELECTIONS
I know it’s the Fourth of July Week here in the US, so it seems weird to be talking about the UK, but it’s worth noting the Labour Party (the liberal party in the UK, like the Democrats here) took over 400 of the 650 seats in the House of Commons.
Why is this important, you ask? Since, oh let’s say 2015, there has been a general push to the Right around the world. You saw that in Conservative wins in Brazil, India, the UK, and even here in the good ole US of A, with the presidency of Trump.
Kev’s opinion – the rise of the Internet and growing ease of migration around the world means that people are starting to get the idea that we are more of a global world than we ever have been. We are all connected through information, supply lines, politics, and 100 other ways.
When a big change like that happens, people push back. So, we had Barack Obama in the US who was very much a believer in a global world, and wanted to have the US work closer with the UN, NATO, and other international arrangements. People in the US, particular older and, frankly, whiter people, didn’t like that, and pushed back. Hard. And hence the conservative push under Trump.
The Labour win in the UK indicates that this might be shifting again. Bolsanaro, the “Trump” of Brazil, was recently indicted on diamond embezzlement charges, and has allegations that he tried to use his power as President to overturn an election that he lost (citing voting fraud. Sound familiar?)
Anyway, my point is that sometimes these things do rock back and forth a little. Perhaps the US will slide a little back into the liberal side, after the hard-Right under Trump. I know people are concerned about the Supreme Court, and rightly so, but I would also say that if you do think that’s a problem, then vote in liberal congressmen/women, and push things back to the center/left. That’s how it works. Try not to push too hard left, or it just invites equal aggressiveness on the other side.
And keep an eye on those Brits. Maybe they can still teach us a thing or two, if they get this worked out.
INSIDE OUT 2 CROSSES $1 BILLION IN RECORD TIME
Pixar’s newest offering, INSIDE OUT 2, grossed over a billion dollars in less than three weeks, the fastest ever for an animated film, and the first movie to cross a billion this year.
Which is saying something, for a fairly mediocre movie. I said what I said.
FINAL NOTES
[Note on Project 2025 – I think I’ll put together a full blog post on this one.
Also Note: I was going to mention Hurricane Beryl, but I think I’ll wait a week, just because I suspect there might be more to discuss next time.]