politics

The Supreme Court was hit by a flurry of damaging new leaks Sunday as a series of confidential memos written by the chief justice were revealed by The New York Times.

The court’s Chief Justice John Roberts was clear to his fellow justices in February: He wanted the court to take up a case weighing Donald Trump’s right to presidential immunity—and he seemed inclined to protect the former president.

“I think it likely that we will view the separation of powers analysis differently,” Roberts wrote to his Supreme Court peers, according to a private memo obtained by the *Times. *He was referencing the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision to allow the case to move forward.

Roberts took an unusual level of involvement in this and other cases that ultimately benefited Trump, according to the Times— his handling of the cases surprised even some other justices on the high court, across ideological lines. As president, Trump appointed three of the members of its current conservative supermajority.

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/13360785

New York Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger has issued a lengthy warning in the Washington Post (9/5/24) on the dangers another Donald Trump presidency would pose to a “free and independent press.”

You might expect this to be a prelude to an announcement that the New York Times would work tirelessly to defend democracy. Instead, Sulzberger heartily defends his own miserably inadequate strategy of “neutrality”—which, in practice, is both-sidesing—making plain his greater concern for the survival of his own newspaper than the survival of US democracy.

ACTION ALERT: You can send a message to the New York Times at [email protected]. Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective. Feel free to leave a copy of your communication in the comments thread.

With the president's decision to drop out of the race, he has effectively begun a longer lame-duck period, which is historically when most presidential clemency grants have occurred.

Apologies for the source, but it seems to be accurate as far as ID'ing the shooter.

A coalition of voting rights groups on Friday sued the Alabama secretary of state and attorney general over a policy they say illegally targets naturalized citizens to keep them from voting in the upcoming November election.

The lawsuit alleges that a recent policy intended to remove noncitizens from Alabama's voter rolls "undermines the fundamental right to vote" by relying on faulty information that discriminates against naturalized citizens, disenfranchises eligible voters, and wrongly refers cases for criminal prosecution.

"Alabama is targeting its growing immigrant population through a voter purge intended to intimidate and disenfranchise naturalized citizens," the lawsuit said.