Pema Levy

@pemalevy.bsky.social

Reporter at @MotherJones.bsky.social Send me secure tips: pemalevy[at]proton.me pemalevy.33 (Signal)

Ironically, Ho abandons his previous defense of birthright citizenship in a speech on "judicial courage" and judicial selection because the new litmus test for a Trump Supreme Court pick is a willingness to end birthright citizenship.

Lawrence Hurley@lawrencehurley.bsky.social · last wk.

Judge Jim Ho out there airing his opinions on a bunch of legal questions, including those he thinks SCOTUS got wrong (gay marriage, birthright citizenship, etc): reason.com/volokh/2026/...

1/ Last summer, @acleek.bsky.social and I started getting emails from staffers of a company called American Healthcare Systems. They told us that their hospitals were in financial chaos and that they were struggling to care for patients. So we started digging: www.motherjones.com/politics/202...

A for-profit hospital slashed costs. Then a patient froze to death on its roof.

A little-known company grew on promises to save distressed hospitals. Instead, it sunk them into financial chaos.

motherjones.com

BREAKING: Federal judge finds that Trump's IRS suit was improper because Trump controlled both sides of the litigation. Judge Kathleen Williams also sanctions Trump's lawyers, issues monetary sanctions, and harshly criticizes DOJ's "untenable" conduct. More to come at Law Dork: www.lawdork.com

The Parties used the existence of federal litigation as a means of conferring legitimacy upon a course of action that they were unwilling to subject to judicial review.
The context of the "settlement," the relationships of the people involved in negotiating and approving it, the ethical implications of their conduct, and the Parties' swift efforts to
dismiss this case after the Court raised fundamental jurisdictional questions all support this conclusion. Accordingly, the Court expressly finds that Plaintiffs acted in bad faith.
See Sofaly v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 155 F.4th 289, 295 (3d Cir. 2025) (monetary sanctions were proper under the court's inherent power where the lawyers acted in bad faith and committed fraud on the court by using "their clients to bring
contrived lawsuits"). That finding is enough to invoke the Court's inherent authority. See JTR Enter., LLC V. Columbian Emeralds, 697 F. App'x 976, 986 (11th Cir. 2017) ("The key to invoking a court's inherent power to sanction is a finding of bad faith.") (citation
omitted).

Thursday night, President Trump removed all members of bipartisan Election Assistance Commission. We just published an expert backgrounder on the implications and what the commission's professional staff can and cannot now do. By the Institute for Responsive Government's Aaron Blacksberg

What is the Election Assistance Commission With No Commissioners?

An expert backgrounder on the implications of President Trump's removal of all members of the bipartisan Election Assistance Commission.

justsecurity.org

The largest part of the Supreme Court's 194-page decision on birthright citizenship is Justice Clarence Thomas's dissent. To Thomas, the 14th Amendment applied only to the freed people after the Civil War. In a concurrence, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson takes on Justice Thomas.

This term, SCOTUS targeted democracy and racial equality in its steady shift toward autocracy The GOP justices disenfranchised minorities, green lit anti-immigrant policies, and demoted Congress to a suggestion-making body. Trump and the court grew more powerful www.motherjones.com/politics/202...

This Supreme Court term was about weakening democracy

The justices shifted power from minorities and Congress to the president and themselves.

motherjones.com

This is my lane. I went through the 194 Trump v Barbara opinion from yesterday section by section, noting what they got right about US migration and citizenship history, and what the dissents get wrong. Please share if you think it is helpful to others.

I Read Trump v Barbara So You Don’t Have To — Anna O. Law

As someone who took 16 years to research and write a new book, Migration and the Origins of American Citizenship , a policy and legal history, I paid keen attention to the oral arguments (April 1) ...

annaolaw.com

Alito and Thomas showing so much disdain for the "feudal" and "medieval" principle of birthright citizenship is so rich. In every other case, they are like, you have to do exactly what they did centuries ago! See Alito on birthright citizenship versus his 13th century authority for overturning Roe.

BildBild

I really want to know if Roberts voted for cert in birthright citizenship case b/c he thought he would show how reasonable the court is as a pr ploy, only to discover he had a bare majority. Or did the dissenters take the case b/c they thought they had a shot to overturn birthright citizenship?

Getting to Thomas' dissent in the Cook case and what a banger. Among many things, he defends Trump's made-up mortgage fraud accusation against Cook as sufficient cause to remove her. This from the justice who let a billionaire buy his mom's house from him and never disclosed it as required by law.

BildBild

Roberts is always going on about how unitary executive theory is more democratic, presidents are the true voice of the people, accountable to the people. But in the real world, that always falls apart. Here, Johnson is an accidental president b/c the people's choice was assassinated.

Leah Litman@leahlitman.bsky.social · last mo.

OMFG. I cannot begin to describe my gasp at how Roberts & co decided to go all in on LOST CAUSE theory & insist that the Reconstruction Congress did Confederate sympathizer President Andrew Johnson wrong by attempting to keep him from destroying Reconstruction www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...

Sotomayor's dissent warns about this. The majority doesn't admit it now. But Slaughter may be the beginning of the end for a merit-based civil service. Do we want qualified people inspecting our food and making complex decisions about medical care, science, etc...? Or ppl who passed a loyalty test?

Barb McQuade@barbmcquade.bsky.social · last mo.

Today’s decision in Slaughter will destroy the independence of the Merit Systems Protection Board, which will have a cascading effect on all federal employees, who have been free from political interference for 150 years. The spoils system is back, baby!

Compare Alito's description of Trump's racist statements (on the left) to Justice Kagan's anthology of Trump's racist statements (on the right). These are passages from this morning's opinions in Mullin v. Doe.

BildBild

Alito in April: States can gerrymander minority citizens' voting rights into oblivion, the 14th Amendment cannot help them. Alito in June: States cannot even modestly limit people's rights to take guns onto private property. This is what the 14th Amendment demands.