@emmamanny111  @jbouieT  @ditzkoffh  @jesseltaylorey ’re not doing that. They’re lamenting that they can’t engage in egregious racial caricature without risk of backlash, especially given the historic potential for propaganda. (You can’t even make Birth of a Nation anymore!)

Tough neighborhood

@cjane87  yeah @EichenIke  i'm @JasonKruszkanot  going to say something could "never " happen. I will say this is how most other democracies work and i haven't seen that happen yet.

@cjane87  Righ@EichenIket  you @JasonKruszka  can filibuster bad policies, and you can also filibuster the dyer bill and the civil rights act. There are consequences either way, but only one of these allows an elected majority to govern according to its mandate, and for the electorate to then respond accordingly.

@cjane87  they @EichenIke  do, @JasonKruszkaall  the time, in the states, and the filibuster means nothing can be done about it even when those decisions are unpopular and the product of successful efforts to insulate legislators from electoral backlash. We're already living in that world.

This is idiotic. People do not have to go to sporting events. They do have to go to work.

There’s really no difference between Trump tweeting executive orders at his television while watching fox news and this.

It's amazing that this is the majority's argument: If Congress meant to authorize OSHA to act so broadly during a once-in-century pandemic, it would have done so previously, when there was no pandemic. checkmate, libs.

@Anon64210061  The argument is that covid is everywhere, so it’s not a particularly workplace related hazard. But it obviously is for anyone who works indoors.

The vaccine mandate cases show that the future of SCOTUS hinges less on the text of the law or the Constitution than the capricious process of conservative identity formation, where something as benign as vaccines can become a culture war battlefield