Friday, March 10, 2023

BOYCOTT TENNESSEE: State passes bill allowing courts to refuse to marry same-sex, mixed-race, transgender couples

WEST HOLLYWOOD, CA - JUNE 26:  Mark Beckfold and Steve Ledoux (R) , who are married, hold their foster son at a celebration of the Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage on June 26, 2015 in West Hollywood, California. The Supreme Court ruled today that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry nationwide without regard to their state's laws.  (Photo by David McNew/Getty Images)
Mark Beckfold and Steve Ledoux (R), who are married, hold their foster son at a celebration of the Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage on June 26, 2015 in West Hollywood, California.

If there ever was a time to boycott a state, now would be it. On Monday, the Tennessee House of Representatives passed a law that allows county clerks to refuse to marry same-sex, transgender, and mixed-race couples if they disagree with the union, The New Republic reports. 

The bill, which now moves to the state Senate, reads: “a person shall not be required to solemnize a marriage if the person has an objection to solemnizing the marriage based on the person’s conscience or religious beliefs.”

In December, President Joe Biden signed the Respect for Marriage Act, but the new law in Tennessee takes advantage of religiously affiliated organizations’ long refusal to issue licenses for same-sex marriages.  

RELATED STORY: Anti-drag Tennessee governor runs from a reporter when confronted with a photo of himself in drag

State Rep. Monty Fritts sponsored the bill. According to the Memphis Flyer, Fritts told the Children and Family Affairs Subcommittee Tuesday that a “big reason” he put forth the bill was to help block elder abuse.

“When you look at some of the research that we have found on this, that … young folks are trying to marry older folks to get to their financial accounts … I think there are other things that we need to do.”

State Rep. Jason Power countered Fritts by saying that the bill was nothing more than a “solution looking for a problem” and “government overreach.”

Tennessee Stands, a conservative religious group, offered its support and hope in favor of passing the bill. 

“Our religious beliefs are sacred, and the exercise of those beliefs is a right that has been given to us by God and is protected by our Constitution,” read a letter Tennessee Stands sent to its followers. “Therefore, all those who perform marriage ceremonies in the state of Tennessee should not be forced by law to perform a ceremony that falls outside of their religious beliefs. They should have the ability to object to participating, without fear of reprisal.”

Many supporters of full marriage equality have expressed fear that Biden’s Respect for Marriage Act doesn’t go far enough. The act protects the laws of the 15 states that permit same-sex marriage, but it equally protects the laws of 35 states that restrict LGBTQ people’s rights, as MSNBC reports. Essentially, it gives religious groups and states way too much room for bias against LGBTQ people.

The passage of this latest bill is just adds to the long list of attacks on the state’s LGBTQ community by its conservative Republican governor.

Gov. Bill Lee has been at war with drag performers in his state. He’s openly said he plans to sign a recently passed bill restricting “adult cabaret performances” and banning gender-affirming care for the state’s minors. This is the same governor who himself was photographed wearing women’s clothing while in college.

The Tennessee ACLU writes that the anti-transgender bills are not only in violation of the First Amendment to express oneself, but they’re “written so broadly and vaguely that they would allow government officials to censor performers based on their own subjective viewpoints of what they deem appropriate on any given day,” and describes the bills as a “malicious attempt to remove LGBTQ people from public life. These bans are being fueled by the same paranoia banning books and censoring teachers.”

A recent statement from Human Rights Campaign legal director Sarah Warbelow reads:

“Instead of focusing on the issues that Tennesseans actually care about, radical politicians are wasting their time and using their power to target the LGBTQ+ community… These bills are not about protecting children, and they are not about religious freedom…They are about stripping away the basic human rights that LGBTQ+ people have fought for over decades … and labeling us dangerous.”

It’s worth noting that this is the same state legislature that voted on a bill in April 2022 that wouldn’t name a legal age for marriage, leading opponents to ask about child sex abuse.

Colorado Gov. Jared Polis with his partner and children.  Boycott Tennessee!

Wednesday, March 8, 2023

CPAC Was a Janky Half-Empty Trump Convention

CPAC Was a Janky Half-Empty Trump Convention  
An attendee wears a mask resembling former president Donald Trump during the Conservative Political Action Conference in National Harbor, Maryland on Friday. (photo: Al Drago/Bloomberg)

 

ALSO SEE: John Hendrickson |The Martyr at CPAC

This Conservative Political Action Conference lacked both conservatives and action.
Ben Jacobs / New York Magazine
08 march 23 

The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) was once a marquee event on the political calendar where Republicans seeking the favor of the party’s conservative base would attempt to woo a crowd of right-wing activists and diehards. In 2015, the last time there was a competitive Republican presidential primary, a dozen candidates showed up, representing all wings of the party from Chris Christie to Ted Cruz. And they weren’t the only ones there, it was a marquee event for the entire right-wing ecosystem with seemingly every group represented. Eight years later, the vibe was entirely different. The 2023 CPAC felt like a mall after all but one of its big department stores has shut down — an emptier, jankier, lower-rent version of conferences past. The rooms were more deserted, the vendors more downmarket, and speakers a little less important.

In the exhibit hall, where Facebook once had a booth with virtual reality games, there was now a booth where attendees could stand on a vibrating board promoted as effort-free exercise which could also boost sexual function. Many of the vendors simply sold Trump merchandise and nothing else. Upstairs, in the main ballroom, the list of speakers was considerably less A-list than in years past. Most potential presidential candidates didn’t show. Aside from Donald Trump, those who did attend had either served in the Trump administration or were political neophytes. And in the halls, it was far less crowded, save for a bottlenecked corner where, at one point, Steve Bannon held court and attendees flocked to see him.

There was no one reason for the event’s decline. The rise of competing conferences like Turning Point USA means CPAC is no longer the only show in town for those who want to spend an entire weekend listening to right-wing celebrities. And while CPAC is still a legacy brand, the allegations of sexual misconduct around its leader, Matt Schlapp, have further diminished its luster. Once a frequent Fox News guest, Schlapp has not appeared on the cable news network in months, and Fox News was almost a non-presence at the event; it did have journalists there, but no longer live-streamed it and none of its prime time hosts appeared on stage.

There’s also the fact that the event has, for years, been turning into a virtual proxy for Donald Trump and Trumpism. It wasn’t just that the halls were packed with attendees in red MAGA hats and wearing t-shirts proclaiming “Trump won” or “Let’s Go Brandon.” It was that the crowd was often indistinguishable from one at a Trump event. Many of the diehard Trump loyalists who followed the former president from rally to rally were now showing up at a conservative confab where panelists once held discussions about how to better achieve economic growth. And those devotees aren’t interested in other speakers. The attendance was at best sparse over much of the three-day conference, and Trump’s 2024 competitors, like Nikki Haley and Mike Pompeo, weren’t even given the courtesy of boos by the MAGA crowd, who reacted instead with something like polite indifference.

The event isn’t receding on all fronts, however. While once mainly a celebration of the American conservative movement, (just last year, Lee Greenwood, the singer of “Proud To Be An American” was inducted to the CPAC Hall of Fame), the event has taken on a somehwat more cosmopolitan air in recent years thanks to the sprouting of various international franchises. Among the most robust are CPAC Hungary, which celebrates strongman prime minister Viktor Orban, and CPAC Brazil, which celebrates ousted strongman president Jair Bolsonaro. The latter spoke at CPAC on Saturday, where a number of attendees waved Brazilian flags and wore Brazilian soccer jerseys as Bolsonaro gave an address in Portuguese. Even the media organizations ringing the ballroom have been internationalized. Outlets linked to the Falun Gong and to the New Federal State of China, a dissident group led by Steve Bannon and his ally Guo Wengui, had prominent space next to conservative outlets like Newsmax and Real America’s Voice.

But this also reinforced the parochial nature of the event. CPAC may have attracted the Trump of Brazil, but it couldn’t draw rising post-Trump Republican stars like Ron DeSantis or Glenn Youngkin. It felt like the continuation of CPAC’s slow spiral from a can’t-miss conservative confluence to an increasingly shabby Trump-con that seems smaller and smaller each year. The cycle feeds itself, just like the once popular mall that attracts fewer customers as stores close, causing more and more stores to close, drawing even fewer customers. And it seems like the exact same demographic of people who only go to a struggling mall to get in their daily steps are the same ones still converging at CPAC to celebrate Trump. The Orange Julius may be gone, but there’s still plenty of kiosks peddling the Orange Donald.

Donnie the Russkie lover found his nose barely above water at CPAC this year.  Maybe he should just emigrate to Putieland with the other redneck conservatives and become one of those oligarchs. It's a place that really needs help to become great again.

Tuesday, March 7, 2023

Time to boycott Walgreens as the chain announces refusal to sell abortion medication in 20 states

Mifepristone (Mifeprex) and Misoprostol, the two drugs used in a medication abortion, are seen at the Women's Reproductive Clinic, which provides legal medication abortion services, in Santa Teresa, New Mexico, on June 17, 2022. Mifepristone is taken first to stop the pregnancy, followed by Misoprostol to induce bleeding. - In the wake of Friday's ruling by the US Supreme Court striking down Roe v Wade and the federally protected right to an abortion, women from Texas and other states are traveling to clinics like the Women's Reproductive Health Clinic in New Mexico for legal abortion services under the state's more liberal laws. - RESTRICTED TO EDITORIAL USE (Photo by Robyn Beck / AFP) / RESTRICTED TO EDITORIAL USE (Photo by ROBYN BECK/AFP via Getty Images)
Mifepristone and misoprostol, the two drugs used in a medication abortion, are seen at the Women's Reproductive Clinic, which provides legal medication abortion services, in Santa Teresa, New Mexico, on June 17, 2022.

Bending to pressure from Republicans and a lawsuit filed in November 2022 by anti-abortion zealots, Walgreens announced Friday the stores would no longer distribute abortion medication in 20 states.

The suit targets the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s decades-long approval of the abortion medication mifepristone, the first in a set of two of drugs used to terminate a pregnancy. 

“We intend to be a certified pharmacy and will distribute Mifepristone only in those jurisdictions where it is legal and operationally feasible,” the company said in a statement.

RELATED STORY: South Carolina Supreme Court struck down 6-week abortion ban. Republicans are debating it again

The 20 states Walgreens includes in its list are those where abortion is banned or restricted. 

Walgreens sent a letter to the Kansas attorney general in early February addressing the state’s concerns, saying, "Walgreens does not intend to dispense Mifepristone within your state." The company additionally told NPR that it responded to all of the attorneys general and told them it has stopped distributing mifepristone in their states.

Republican attorneys general from 19 states sent letters to CVS, Costco, Walmart, Albertsons, and Kroger.

A statement from Rite Aid spokesperson Catherine Carter sent to CNN said, “Rite Aid is monitoring the latest federal, state, legal, and regulatory developments regarding mifepristone dispensing, and we will continue to evaluate the Company’s ability to dispense mifepristone in accordance with those developments.”

Medication abortion is at the center of the reproductive justice battle. A federal judge in Texas is set to rule soon on the abortion medication.

According to The Hill, conservative Judge Matthew Kacsmar, appointed by former President Donald Trump, is expected to rule against the FDA’s drug approval. Kacsmar has a history of opposition to abortion.

Mifepristone, used in conjunction with misoprostol, is the most common medication abortion regimen in the U.S.

Calls for a nationwide boycott of Walgreens are growing. Filmmaker Michael Moore has been vocal in calling for a boycott of the 9,200-store chain. 

“This decision by Walgreens to further cement women’s status as second-class citizens must be met forcefully by each and every one of us. Every day of our silence since last Thursday is another day of you and I enabling this bigotry and misogyny,” Moore wrote on his website. “Please join with me and others in a NATIONWIDE BOYCOTT OF WALGREENS. They must reverse their decision immediately.”

According to California’s KRON, Gov. Gavin Newsom tore into the chain on Monday, saying the state would no longer be doing business with it. “California won’t be doing business with Walgreens or any company that cowers to extremists and puts women’s lives at risk.”

“We’re done,” the California governor added.

Calls for a nationwide boycott of Walgreens are growing. Award-wining documentary filmmaker Michael Moore has been vocal in calling for a boycott of the 9,200-store chain.

Monday, March 6, 2023

The IRS is proving what government can do when it’s actually adequately funded

A man walks into the Internal Revenue Service building in Washington, DC on March 10, 2016.  / AFP / Andrew Caballero-Reynolds        (Photo credit should read ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP/Getty Images)

It’s pretty remarkable, what happens when government is adequately funded. The Internal Revenue Service is proving it, already putting its new funding to use to making this a normal, relatively painless tax season. Just last fall, it got nearly $80 billion to spend over the next 10 years in the Inflation Reduction Act and it turned it around fast, thanks entirely to congressional Democrats and President Joe Biden. That’s the funding, by the way, that Barely Speaker Kevin McCarthy and his band of maniacs tried to repeal in their first big policy bill—the bill that would have cost the nation $114 billion over the next decade.

With enough funding, the agency is answering 90% of its phone calls, actually providing customer service. It’s processed almost every return filed so far for the year—99.7% of them so far, while also dispensing with it backlog of overdue returns. It’s got 2 million paper returns—yes, paper—from the 2022 and 2021 tax years that still need to be reviewed or corrected, down from nearly 24 million this time last year. It’s because it could finally hire enough people to both answer the phones and handle these files and maintain other systems.

“That means returns are coming in more accurately,” Timur Taluy, CEO of FileYourTaxes.com told the Washington Post. “The IRS systems are able to process them more quickly. That’s a real benefit to taxpayers.” Taluy is one of a panel of industry experts that consults with the IRS. “An appropriately funded IRS, given its skill set and people, can make a filing season work.”

We'll know the IRS has officially reached full operating capacity when the Trumpster finally gets his due for a lifetime of tax dodging.

Sunday, March 5, 2023

FBI undermined Russia investigation, downplayed Jan. 6, tried to block Mar-a-Lago search

WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 10: FBI Director Christopher Wray testifies during a House Judiciary Committee oversight hearing on Capitol Hill June 10, 2021 in Washington, DC. Wray fielded a wide range of questions, including several about the January 6th Capitol riot. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
Wray answering questions about Jan. 6, but not informing Congress on how his team was soft on insurgents

There has always been an element within the FBI that has gone out of its way to protect Donald Trump. In the run-up to the 2016 election, as The New York Times was devoting every single column of the front page to the “scandal” of Hillary Clinton’s email server, a story about Trump’s connections between the Trump campaign and Russian agents was consigned to a brief account on an inside page, in part because FBI sources informed the NYT that there was nothing to the story. (Note that The New York Times was well aware that an investigation into Trump’s connections to Russia was underway, but chose not to run the story until well after the election.)

In January, Charles McGonigal, the former chief of counterintelligence at the FBI, was charged with money laundering for a Russian oligarch. McGonigal worked directly with oligarch Oleg Deripaska, who was also a major part of the Trump campaign’s connections to Russia in 2016, and the source of many of the lies about Joe Biden and Ukraine that Rudy Giuliani tried to push in the 2020 election cycle. (Lies that The New York Times published unchallenged.)

In the wake of the Jan. 6 insurrection, top officials at the FBI were warned that “a sizable percentage of the employee population felt sympathetic to the group that stormed the Capitol.” They were also warned that the agency might have difficulty investigating those involved on Jan. 6 because many agents believed that going after the criminals who stormed the Capitol was just “political correctness.”

The FBI is broken. It remains broken.  The latest evidence comes from a Washington Post report that FBI agents not only tried to block the search of Mar-a-Lago for the classified documents that the DOJ knows Trump was hiding, but they also tried to stop the investigation entirely at a point when Trump was still holding boxes of secret information.

The FBI search of Mar-a-Lago took place in July 2022, 18 months after Trump left the White House and almost as long after the National Archives first began trying to get Trump to return documents they knew he had taken.  Previous attempts to find those missing documents had already turned up a wealth of classified information, including documents classified as top secret and folders for other classified information that wasn’t found. The Archives, and the Department of Justice, had good reason to believe Trump was still holding other documents which he refused to return, even though Trump’s attorneys had assured them both that nothing else remained.

Previous to the July search, the DOJ was provided with new evidence—likely in the terms of testimony from someone who had worked with Trump at Mar-a-Lago—that Trump was knowingly holding classified documents at his Florida resort and was showing these documents to others. But when the department ordered a warranted search of the premises…

Two senior FBI officials who would be in charge of leading the search resisted the plan as too combative and proposed instead to seek Trump’s permission to search his property, according to the four people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a sensitive investigation.

At this point, Trump had returned at least three groups of documents, each supposedly the “last” he had. He had passed on what the DOJ knew to be lies, stating that no more documents were stored at Mar-a-Lago.

This was “one of several previously unreported clashes in a tense tug of war between two arms of the Justice Department over how aggressively to pursue a criminal investigation of a former president.” That included FBI agents working to “slow the probe” into Trump’s handling of classified documents, 

Some of those field agents wanted to shutter the criminal investigation altogether in early June, after Trump’s legal team asserted a diligent search had been conducted and all classified records had been turned over, according to some people with knowledge of the discussions.

That’s not just extraordinary, it should be unforgivable. Any law enforcement agent so slanted in their approach that they would protect someone from an investigation, even after they had proven to repeatedly lie in public, in court, and to the FBI, should have been immediately dismissed.

Many of the documents that the National Archives was seeking were not found in the search. Exactly how hard is the FBI working to find those documents now?

Why is the FBI tolerating such behavior? It doesn’t take much more than a look at the very top: Trump-appointed FBI Director Christopher Wray.

Wray was allowed to remain in office even though the agents under his command were acting to undercut the investigation into the Trump campaign’s crimes, even though one of his top officials was working directly with the Russian mob, even though his agents were expressing sympathy for those who took part in the January 6 insurgency. 

When the top law enforcement agency in the nation is coming down on the side of those trying to overthrow the legitimate government, that’s not just a red flag; it’s a four-alarm siren. Now it’s clear that not only was nothing done to correct the destructive culture that has taken root inside the FBI, but that sickness has been allowed—or even encouraged—to spread and grow. 

The FBI is broken. Fixing it is going to require a lot of work. That work starts with getting rid of Christopher Wray.

"When the top law enforcement agency in the nation is coming down on the side of those trying to overthrow the legitimate government, that’s not just a red flag; it’s a four-alarm siren."

Thursday, March 2, 2023

Russia hoping to attract 7 million Conservatives. (An opportunity just made for MTG - and she can take the redneck red staters with her.)

 
Daddy Vladdy is waiting for you!

Well here’s a solution for MTG’s “National Divorce” proposal: move to Russia!

Turns out Russia has formulated a plan for “ideological immigration” targeting European and American Conservatives.

Think your country is going too “woke”? Can’t stand all the rights and freedoms being granted to LGBTQ+ people? Want to find a safe space from all the “woke” liberals around you? You’re going to LOVE Russia, a place where “Don’t Say Gay” is enforced at gunpoint and where “woke” liberals are sent to die a violent death on the front lines.

As a result of the conference held in Moscow on February 14, dedicated to ideological immigration to Russia, it was announced the creation of a Coordinating Headquarters for assistance to immigrants from NATO countries. This decision may give rise to a new direction in the migration policy of the Russian Federation, the main task of which will be the resettlement of residents of the United States and the European Union who are friendly towards Russia towards Russia.

Outlining the tasks of the coordinating headquarters, Dmitry Gusev, the first deputy head of the A Just Russia - For Truth faction in the State Duma, noted that one should not persuade those who do not love her to return to their homeland, but help those who consciously want to move to the Russian Federation. Since such a decision is closely related to the worldview and religious affiliation of potential migrants, their immigration is called ideological.

As an incentive for resettlement in Russia, D. Gusev at the end of January proposed to provide migrants from the USA and Europe with 10 hectares of land, hoping that up to 7 million people could take advantage of this offer. This proposal was not mentioned in the announcement about the creation of a coordinating headquarters for ideological immigration. Although the work of the headquarters was planned to be discussed at a closed meeting with representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

www.ritmeurasia.org/…

Come emigrate to Sunny Russia, comrade! Daddy Vladdy’s got you covered!

You seriously just cannot make this shit up.

Relax, Daddy Vladdy is just dressing up for Halloween.  You don't think he might be a closet gay, do you?
 

Wednesday, March 1, 2023

Trump's Supreme Court appointees likely to kill Biden student loan forgiveness plan

WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 28: Rahna Epting speaks as student loan borrowers and advocates gather for the People's Rally To Cancel Student Debt During The Supreme Court Hearings On Student Debt Relief on February 28, 2023 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Jemal Countess/Getty Images for People's Rally to Cancel Student Debt )
Rahna Epting speaks as student loan borrowers and advocates gather for the People's Rally To Cancel Student Debt during the Supreme Court hearing.

Two challenges to President Joe Biden’s student debt relief program were heard by the U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday, four months after a lower court halted it. The Biden plan cancels up to $10,000 in debt for all federal borrowers with an income of less than $125,000 per year and up to $20,000 for people who had Pell grants, all under the federal HEROES Act. That would wipe out an estimated $430 billion of federal student loan debt

The separate challenges to the legality of the program were brought by Republican states—Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, and South Carolina—and by the Job Creators Network Foundation, a conservative group, on behalf of student loan borrowers Alexander Taylor and Myra Brown. The states’ argument is that they would be deprived of revenue if students with commercial loans consolidated them under the Department of Education’s lending program, where a chunk of the debt could be forgiven. The two borrowers argued that it wasn’t fair that they were left out of the forgiveness program because it has arbitrary eligibility rules and was created without following normal regulatory procedures requiring periods of public comment.

The administration argues that the program is absolutely legal and used the appropriate vehicle—the HEROES Act of 2003, which gives the Education Department broad authority to modify or to waive student loan payments in a national emergency. In 2003, the national emergency was the Iraq war and the beneficiaries were the troops fighting in it. In 2020, obviously, the emergency was the COVID-19 pandemic. The Trump administration paused student loan repayments and suspended accrual of interest in March of that year using the HEROES Act. The Biden administration extended it and, in August of 2022, expanded it to include debt forgiveness.

The first hurdle both sets of plaintiffs face is standing—are they explicitly harmed by the policy enough to have the court intervene? For this Supreme Court, with its Trump-packed majority, that’s a low hurdle.

RELATED: Supreme Court will take on student debt relief challenge in expedited hearing

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar argued, along with the court’s liberal justices, that neither plaintiff could prove that. The states were arguing that the loan forgiveness program’s potentially harms one entity in Missouri, a student-loan servicing company called MOHELA that was created by the state. MOHELA declined to be a part of the states’ case, and Prelogar pointed out that MOHELA is independent of the state, chose not to sue, and how could Missouri—and then, by extension, all the other states—claim harm if MOHELA wasn’t.

“Usually, we don’t allow one person to step into another’s shoes and say, ‘I think that that person suffered harm,’ even if the harm is very great,” Justice Elena Kagan told the states’ lawyer. “So why isn’t MOHELA responsible for deciding whether to bring this suit?”

“MOHELA isn’t here,” said Justice Sonia Sotomayor. “We don’t allow someone else to step in on behalf of someone else” in a federal lawsuit.

Even conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett had a problem with that. “Why didn’t the state make MOHELA come if MOHELA is an arm of the state?” she asked. Even should Barrett side with the liberals on this question, it’s unlikely they’d find a fifth vote to dismiss the states’ case on standing. As for the borrowers, the argument is tenuous—they were harmed by not being eligible for the forgiveness program, and might have benefited if the administration had chose a different route for the forgiveness program. Basically, they’re arguing if they can’t have loan forgiveness, no one else should either.

There was a lot of focus among the court’s conservatives on “fairness,” which really isn’t a legal argument at all and came across as just a bit silly. Chief Justice Roberts started that one off with a hypothetical situation: two high school graduates, one who chooses to go to college and takes out loans, and a second who decides to get a loan to start a lawn care business.

“Nobody is telling the person who was trying to set up the lawn service business that he doesn’t have to pay his loan,” Roberts said. Justice Samuel Alito piled on, asking, “Why is it fair? Why was it fair to the people who didn’t get arguably comparable relief?”

That brought a succinct explanation from a probably annoyed Justice Sonia Sotomayor, pointing out that they are in apples-and-oranges territory: “Different people got different benefits under different programs.” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also chimed in on the absurdity of this argument, asking Prelogar if that would open up essentially all government programs to a question of fairness.

Sotomayor was there to remind all the participants of the stakes. “There’s 50 million students who are—who will benefit from this. Who today will struggle. Many of them don’t have assets sufficient to bail them out after the pandemic. They don’t have friends or families or others who can help them make these payments,” she said.

“And what you’re saying is now we’re going to give judges the right to decide how much aid to give them instead of the person with the expertise and the experience, the secretary of education who’s been dealing with educational issues and the problems surrounding student loans,” she continued.

Those are not the people the majority of the Supreme Court cares about. The majority, possibly without Barrett this time, proved hostile to the administration. Because they expedited hearing the case, they might issue a decision on an expedited basis, before the usual May-June period for decisions from the spring session.

How prescient they were, but then it isn't rocket science to understand that the bad guys in this country are the Republicans and the lackeys they put on the courts, especially SCOTUS.  Which means the 30 percent of the country that doesn't realize they are getting bamboozled by the GOP are really stupid and probably couldn't get in a college anyway.

"WE THE PEOPLE": AMERICA IS BACK!

A Blue Wave Just Crashed on Trump   Senator-elect James Talarico at an Election Night event in Au...