Technically, SCOTUS didn't do anything. They refused to take up the case, which means the 5th Circuit's ruling, that superseded both lower courts that affirmed it was illegal by saying "we'll address it next year after the primaries," was the final say.
The thing that needs to be made sense of is why the 5th Circuit is allowed to operate in bad-faith as a rubber stamp for everything Conservative.
Wow, a whole list of "things that never happened."
Please, get help to escape the conspiracy feedback loop you're obviously in.
Yes, but have you considered that if we legalize weed, Satan might get your kids?
/s
Reminder that Project 2025 is a Heritage Foundation plan to gut the powers of Congress and policy-making commissions, and to disproportionately empower the Executive branch.
I do not think for a minute that the 2026 date is accidental.
I don't think it's an agenda, I think it's just poorly delivered. The facts are:
Teen hacks corps using a Fire Stick.
Teen has done something novel with proprietary hardware.
I think it's safe to assume that he's intelligent and creative based on those two things. With proper guidance from the right kinds of people (including parents), someone like that could eventually put those talents to use on someone's Red Team, or working with an intelligence agency, rather than doing something illegal to stretch their wings (fuck big corporations, but the law is what it is).
I don't think it's unreasonable to note that his talents will be wasted by grinding him down in the justice system.
Reminder that this isn't a GOP document, it's a Heritage Foundation document (right wing extremists).
They could try to follow it, but the Heritage Foundation ≠ GOP. If anything, the Federalist Society is a far greater threat, since they have tactfully and successfully infected the judiciary, and they don't even have a public manifesto of this nature.
This is certainly concerning, but it's far from guaranteed to be utilized.
Standing could be as simple as "it harms the American people to allow him to run." The lawyer doesn't have to be directly injured, since class action lawsuits are brought on behalf of entire groups all the time.
Not that it's a slam dunk reason, but I would hope and think the lawyer in question knows that they have to prove some amount of standing.
She fell prey to one of the classic blunders.
Does anyone know if there was a motive? I didn't see one in the article, but maybe I missed it.
Either way, she deserves permanent incarceration away from society. "Fucked up" is an inadequate description.
We do want this in our politics, but when we have fascists calling from inside the house, it's a luxury we can't afford right now.
Once fascism is no longer a viable political path for extremists, then we can talk about improving candidate quality and having better options. From where we are currently, though, it feels like putting the cart before the horse.
Well as we know, all cishet people know exactly who they are at any given time, and their personality, philosophy, epistemology, and tastes never cha—oh wait...
Must suck for him being so boring and predictable all the time, that he has to invent reasons to get all hot and bothered.
No. Fuck Facebook, and fuck Zuck. There isn't a world in which they would federate and respect our privacy.
See how they build internal user profiles for users not on Facebook through tags and other metadata scraping techniques. If people you know talk about you on Facebook, there's a shadow profile about you out there, waiting to connect with you in real time. I have no reason to think they wouldn't do the same kind of shit here.