Judge Hardiman running the "disparate impact" machine https://t.co/1WsSezxjKX [link fixed; earlier tweet deleted]
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 9, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
Monthly Archives: July 2018
0
Judge Hardiman running the "disparate impact" machine https://t.co/1ht4iy5zha
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 9, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Another long-planned "holiday gathering" … https://t.co/LOqJ60a2SU https://t.co/xm1WzrRE7f
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 9, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
It's John Edwards? https://t.co/TYxnLh2KU0
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 9, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
"Electoral research in Denmark has shown that many recent general elections have been decided on the basis of which parties voters expect to deliver the highest standards of non-liberal immigration policy." https://t.co/DhYjPD9Yrg
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 9, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Immigration control got left out when Trump planned his first year. Gotta cut taxes! Got left out of omnibus. Gotta increase defense! Will it get shaft in @SCOTUS pick too? (Gotta end Roe! Protect 2a! etc.) Kethledge or Hardiman would mean yes, it's shafted. 202 456 1414 this AM https://t.co/BFMo5CZ7sQ
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 9, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
A wrong @SCOTUS choice by @realDonaldTrump means 5-4 MAJORITY TO TIE UP HIS IMMIGRATION PLANS for rest of his term. Kethledge hi probability of disaster. Hardiman risky. Kavanaugh strongest. Not too late to call White House next few hours to subtly make this point 202 456 1414 https://t.co/BFMo5CHw4g
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 9, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
MSM tends to cover the costs of tariffs, but not benefits. I know in theory net $$ benefits of no tariffs are higher. But these are lower-skilled manufacturing jobs. Should cover both. https://t.co/Vldmu6twcC
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
"All but ruled out" is not the same thing as "ruled out." Unfortunately. #stayparanoid https://t.co/fHi1emkJu3
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Santorum on Hardiman: “[H]e has helped people seeking asylum from communist countries. He speaks Spanish. His wife comes from a Democratic family, and he knows how to engage with all kind of people…” Sounds like good Senate candidate, but this is @SCOTUS https://t.co/Ifb59N04YS
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
We can argue how troubling Hardiman's immigration opinions are (discussed here https://t.co/LIm6Vbfxfa). But Kavanaugh has written things in several cases that are actually good, not just maybe not troubling. If you care about Trump's immigration agenda, it doesn't seem close. https://t.co/1nr5B9s8u4
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Pro bono work for Ayuda, helping with asylum claims. Not that there's anything wrong with it! But if you were betting man would you say this person is going to be welcoming of tough asylum standards or more concerned with elaborate due proces (even if that lets system be gamed)? https://t.co/hmlLJnqG8c
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Again, you're ignoring the Coulter evidence. (Leonard Leo does not seem impressed with the "92 of 97" talking point either). https://t.co/kTJIEWybpD
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Bit of shade from Leonard Leo …. https://t.co/HhX2ZQ7AR8
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Bit of shade from Leonard Leo …. https://t.co/HhX2ZQ7AR8
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
You're ignoring the Coulter evidence. She says in effect 'I know the guy, worked w/ him, & he's the opposite of Trump.' That wouldn't necessarily show up in run-of-mill individual deportation cases. It might in big SCOTUS cases-eg whatever due process claims ACLU throws at Ct https://t.co/u6AjKggJlV
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
This is the basic context: Kethledge could have real practical negative impact on what happens w/ the #1 issue to voters. Esp. at @SCOTUS level, you're not just 'following the rules.' You're deciding what rules are. Not always clear! Values matter. Even if you're an originalist https://t.co/BFMo5CHw4g
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Please keep calling. McConnell's argument is that there's no controversy around Kethledge so he'll be easy to confirm. Calling shows there is a controversy (he's the "opposite of Trump on immigration"). Thanks. https://t.co/SEo8Bf0yAu
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
This does seem like mere sneering. The argument is that even if you're an originalist it matters what your views/values are. And he seems to be a "we need more immigrant workers" guy–per Coulter who worked w/ him. Strong evidence-that you aren't refuting https://t.co/NQqZ1dXEcN https://t.co/yNuotcMKmd
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
REUPPING: EMERGENCY STILL ON. McConnell pushing Trump to blow it by choosing Kethledge, "the opposite of Trump on immigration." Need to start calling at opening of business TODAY. There are still a few hours to show there's opposition to Kethledge. Thanks. https://t.co/SEo8Bf0yAu
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
There seems to be some Federalist fantasy that "the law" is crystal clear unless you're a bleeding heart liberal activist squish. If you read, say, Bork's "Tempting," you know that's not true. Lot of judgment, room for values/disagreement. We're right to care what judges think https://t.co/jz2vQ1ikD6
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Of course not. But there will be lots of lawsuits and four liberal justices ready to throw all sorts of constitutional/interpretive obstacles in the way of legislation to control immigration. All they need is one more vote … https://t.co/jz2vQ1ikD6
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
We haven't even gotten to Equal Protection or Due Proces cases–constitutional, not legislative,–which involve weighing & balancing interests (even if doctrine pretends they don't). If "the law" were mechanically clear we wouldn't need judges. https://t.co/Tn6oWVGUKA
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Another ex.: The issue of the Flores consent decree, which Trump desperately wants to get out of, (It says can't detain families together.) That decision willl probably involve lots of uncertain, prudential considerations. Matters who is making them. https://t.co/4hfuLhtfgt
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey
0
Um, no. But for ex. there's an issue whether DACA, and also Trump's' rescission of DACA, is legal & constitutional. It's SCOTUS that will decide this, not legislature. Not open & shut cases. There's some play in the joints & judges aren't superhuman. https://t.co/jz2vQ1ikD6
— Mickey Kaus (@kausmickey) July 8, 2018
from Twitter https://twitter.com/kausmickey