You have really done homework that bogles the mind. Thank you for a very practical and visual explanation of what these decisions represent. Onward Gab!
The Supreme Court was hand picked to obey the Republican elite, even went so far as to refuse to approve a Democratic president's right to replace a vacancy.
Your analysis really cleared out a lot of mental clutter and gaps for me about the shadow docket and the court’s apparent position on unitary executive theory. The graphs are clear and easy to understand. Great job!
This is fascinating stuff, but it turns major decisions that will affect us all into some sort of game. Where are the justices whose rulings will be read by students and legal scholars in the future and why is it OK for them to render decisions without reasons? A bit apart from your topic but its part of my general confusion
Very useful. Thanks, Gabe. It's somehow reassuring that there is some values-based logic behind the rulings and not that we are just awash in corruption, which is how it feels right now.
Brilliant. The way you describe this new strategy reminds me a lot of "cutting the corner" in boxing. We've seen Trump and his people at a lot of UFC fights lately, even saying that they'll host a UFC fight at the White House. I would love to hear your take on what kind of strategies they might be taking from MMA, boxing, etc. into the political arena.
Thank you for this analysis with supporting graphics. Making sense of the shadow docket has been quite helpful in trying to understand our current issues in this country.
Another brilliant analysis. Government is complicated, and attempts to simplify almost inevitably lead to bias. Your analyses bring a much-needed critical and sober perspective to these complicated issues.
Chevy Chase laid it out in National Lampoon with a (funny/scary) piece titled, Mission Impeachable. This was back in the days of George McGovern's run for President in 1972.
Of course Gabe really gets at the facts, which I always find comforting...but humor helps too :-)
Outstanding and valuable analysis.
You have really done homework that bogles the mind. Thank you for a very practical and visual explanation of what these decisions represent. Onward Gab!
This has been extremely informative, thanks for all the analyses. Obviously a conservative bias but more nuanced than the expected.
The Supreme Court was hand picked to obey the Republican elite, even went so far as to refuse to approve a Democratic president's right to replace a vacancy.
Your analysis really cleared out a lot of mental clutter and gaps for me about the shadow docket and the court’s apparent position on unitary executive theory. The graphs are clear and easy to understand. Great job!
Fabulous and easy to read graphs, a great succinct ending, and highly informative. Thank You.
This is fascinating stuff, but it turns major decisions that will affect us all into some sort of game. Where are the justices whose rulings will be read by students and legal scholars in the future and why is it OK for them to render decisions without reasons? A bit apart from your topic but its part of my general confusion
Very useful. Thanks, Gabe. It's somehow reassuring that there is some values-based logic behind the rulings and not that we are just awash in corruption, which is how it feels right now.
Brilliant. The way you describe this new strategy reminds me a lot of "cutting the corner" in boxing. We've seen Trump and his people at a lot of UFC fights lately, even saying that they'll host a UFC fight at the White House. I would love to hear your take on what kind of strategies they might be taking from MMA, boxing, etc. into the political arena.
Thank you so much for this awesome analysis!!!!
Thank you for this analysis with supporting graphics. Making sense of the shadow docket has been quite helpful in trying to understand our current issues in this country.
Fantastic analysis!
Wow! What a great analysis. I think you have picked the wrong profession - you write and analyze like a master PoliSci professor - only better.
Very good piece.
But proofreading, or lack thereof, let you down here:
"they both voted aginst Trump in the iitial case invovlign spending. In the second speding case, Barrett..."
Come on now. All the work he put into this piece can surely earn him some grace on a typo.
But no effect on the meening!
Another brilliant analysis. Government is complicated, and attempts to simplify almost inevitably lead to bias. Your analyses bring a much-needed critical and sober perspective to these complicated issues.
Chevy Chase laid it out in National Lampoon with a (funny/scary) piece titled, Mission Impeachable. This was back in the days of George McGovern's run for President in 1972.
Of course Gabe really gets at the facts, which I always find comforting...but humor helps too :-)