//
sign in
Profile
by @danabra.mov
Profile
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
Profile
by @jimpick.com
AviHandle
by @danabra.mov
AviHandle
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
AviHandle
by @katherine.computer
EventsList
by @katherine.computer
ProfileHeader
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileHeader
by @danabra.mov
ProfileMedia
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePlays
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileReplies
by @danabra.mov
Record
by @atsui.org
Skircle
by @danabra.mov
StreamPlacePlaylist
by @katherine.computer
+ new component
Profile
Loading...









Loading...
Love that every time this document refers to one of the *many* times the Supreme Court reaffirms disparate impact doctrine, it states that the Court “controversially” did XYZ. Really extra clearly convincing!
They're calling it an IPO because they're not legally allowed to put up a banner reading HEY WOULD YOU LIKE TO HOLD A BAG, YOU BIG FUCKING IDIOT
So this happened. Can we just go ahead and say that OLC opinions aren’t really worth the paper they’re printed on any more?
6h
14h
6h
Big week for Elon Musk, instigating a racist anti-immigrant pogrom on Tuesday, set to become a trillionaire with the backing of all the biggest banks on Friday.
It would be nice if one (1) prominent American got on TV to say, "This IPO must be stopped. The reward for sending mobs to murder families, for condemning millions of the poorest humans alive to death, cannot be a trillion dollars." Probably changes nothing, but at least it would have been said.
And please don't start ex post factoing or bill of attaindering me. My entire point is that the payback part of reconstructionism *cannot be bound by existing constitutional rules or norms.* Payback must proceed as a recognition that the constitutional order has failed and now does not bind us.