Hellooooo Mspsocial! Nice to meet you! I'm Josh. I like reading, gaming, and many other things.
Here are the living beings that depend on me, Kentucky cat and Louisiana cat. Kentucky is from Kentucky, has no teeth, and enjoys chasing her toys. Louisiana's origin is unknown, but that was her name at the Minneapolis shelter so it seemed like fate. She enjoys waking me up in the morning to feed her.
I'm Josh and trying to figure out how to be a lawyer.
I have two cats, Kentucky and Louisiana.
I post about the Court, USPol, puzzles, my cats, and whatever media catches my fancy.
Me, playing Metroid Dread about half way through: The pleasure is in the exploration, the unlocking of new abilities. The devs lovingly crafted it all.
Me, playing Metroid Dread closer to the end when abilities need to be deployed in quick succession to grab all the collectibles: You sadistic fucks.
This movie didn't go at all how I thought it would, incidentally. It was both kinder and a rougher experience. I'm trying not to spoil anything, but it's a dark, Northern fable worth the time.
I can't get over the animal politics in this and how many shots it must have taken to get reactions that humans could read into in certain ways. Our brains anthropomorphize pretty easily, but it still seems like getting certain reactions for us to read it one way would have been difficult.
Kind of interesting to hear some of the proponents of term limits go from pro term limits to against them, not necessarily because term limits are bad, but because they don't trust the Senate.
I think there are three major reforms we need to make our government work better for everyone. I think that is:
1) Jettisoning the filibuster;
2) Expanding the House;
3) Court expansion.
Oddly, although I think it gets the most attention, I don't think the executive needs much reform that wouldn't already be enacted through all of the above.
And all of this could be boiled down to getting rid of the filibuster.
Com. Balkin calling out the Senate as broken and thus preventing the Court from also working well.
Me, when Com. Baude adds his two cents:
Chapter 2 seems to be the most contentious chapter for the framing problem.
It's nice to hear that there are people on this commission that are interested in structural changes.
Com. Crespo: "I don't think the court expansion arguments should be framed to set up court expansion knockdowns." Nice.
I know there is a whole rhetorical apparatus that has a vested interest in the scaffolding that wants you to perceive judges and justices as law-spewing automatons, but people don't work that way.
Idk, maybe it's just me, but if you want people to respect the law, you need to be honest about how people interact with law and how they decide it, which means being honest that people have biases and those biases fill in how law is decided.
Com. Griffith is reading from a statement that definitely makes him sound disingenuous rather than the tone he's going for, which is that the judges are non-partisan actors.
Really like how Com. Hill talks about how the structure of the report and how it always falls on "but court expansion is bad for reasons."
Me: Oh, I shouldn't jump to the conclusion that this person is an Originalist before they start commenting.
Com. Baude: "As an Originalist..."
Witch Hat Atelier, Vol. 8
This is a great volume for thinking about the world from the standpoint of others who have to approach the world in a way that's different from the majority of others.
Mint-in-the-box lawyer. Loves too many things.
A community centered on the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota, and their surrounding region. Predominantly queer with a focus on urban and social justice issues.