30 Comments
User's avatar
Marlene Lerner-Bigley (CA)'s avatar

Thank you, Allison for this very comprehensive breakdown of Judge Breyer’s decision. We Californians can thank our AG Rob Bonta who is doing extraordinary work.

Expand full comment
John H's avatar

Finally, a sane and rational interpretation of the statute. The slow-moving coup that this administration is trying to accomplish is meeting some guardrails.

Expand full comment
Jon52's avatar

I'm guessing/betting that this Supreme Court will overturn this decision limiting presidential power to deploy the National Guard, just as it has overturned so many others before it. Americans need to realize we have a rogue court, one that was carefully constructed to play a major role in turning America into an authoritarian state. Remember when they ruled Biden overstepped his authority when his administrations cancelled student loans? Quaint, no? If/when Democrats regain power, adding four justices the SCOTUS—completely justified since we now have 13 judicial districts—is absolutely mandatory. Then we can set about putting our government back together again and our saving democracy

Expand full comment
Sue's avatar

Not only add to the court but impeach the Supreme MAGA’s.

Expand full comment
KathyInCali's avatar

I remember when Biden had 1 bad debate. His health/mental fitness/age/life-death is still being questioned! Meanwhile we have a Weekend at Bernie’s situation going on in DC, and our so called media has its eyes as tightly closed as DT does at any important appearance/trial/funeral/briefing/2nd term.😴💤😴💤

Expand full comment
Jon52's avatar

Trump's firat move right out of the gate in 2016 was to dominate the media. Controlling the media is key to authoritarianism. While there is still good reporting going on, the day to day reporting around this president is often detached from reality. That's what happens when the media is almost all corporate owned.

Expand full comment
Valerie's avatar

Aaaahhhhh yes, it'll go to SCOTUS. The same one where Kavanaugh with a wink said in slightly different words, it's ok to use race to nab immigrants. Thank you Allison for all you do. I just have no faith in this court to do the right thing. None. Zilch. Zero. It's sickening.

Expand full comment
Heather Hay Charron 🇨🇦's avatar

Thanks for this clear explanation of the Judge’s decisions; very important for discussions and expectations moving forward.

Expand full comment
Wd52's avatar

Trump's wet dream is Martial Law and suspension of elections. History shows NO DICTATOR ever leaves power without being forced. And remember, almost 7 billion people pray every day for Trump to sleep with Ivana under the golf course ASAP.

Expand full comment
Paul Schwartz's avatar

Mommy, mommy I am going to run to my other personal lawyers SCOTUS

Expand full comment
Linda's avatar

Thank you Allison. Very easy to understand. We will see how long it takes the Supreme Court to overturn.

Expand full comment
Carol Moore's avatar

My concern as well, AG: if the definition of "regular" means the military, this regime will use the Insurrection Act to deploy regular army troops on the streets of American cities -- which is what they've been itching to do since January (and in 2020 as well).

Expand full comment
Michelle Brody's avatar

I have the same concern Carol.

Expand full comment
Karen Humphries's avatar

This administration is the never ending nightmare. And now they are threatening the ICC unless that court agrees to never try to prosecute Trump and members of his administration. Looks to me that they know they are committing crimes and plan to continue to do so.

Expand full comment
Michelle Brody's avatar

Allison, your analysis of Judge Breyer's decision provided significant clarity.

Thank you. And so we wait...

Expand full comment
Candy C's avatar

Thank you for this clear explanation of Judge Breyer’s decision, Allison. Reasonable jurisprudence is on display here, and if SCOTUS does overturn this, I hope their feet are held to the fire to explain why.

Expand full comment
🌈 Lance Trottier 🌈's avatar

The Felonious Foreskin, aka the Oaf in the Oaful Orifice, is supposed to be the self-proclaimed "Peace President", and a member of the GOP, the so-called "Party of Law and Order".

So, far, between his immigration bullshit and ICE tactics therein are not "peaceful", nor are they resembling "law and order".

Also, his botched bombing (and Signal Chat scandal) aren't showing "peace" or "law and order"

And, his attacks on civilian boats and the killings of almost 90 people (including second strike on survivors) outside of US waters based on allegation and suspicion, with zero evidence before or afterwards to validate the strikes as any sort of threat to the US is far from demonstrating "peace" and "law and order".

His deployment of the National Guard into American cities, primarily Democrat-run cities does not instill feelings of "peace" or "law and order".

His hatred, racism, misogyny, and all of his other forms of prejudice that he exhibits daily (nightly) do not resemble any form of "peace" or "law and order".

His verbal and "legal" attacks on his opponents do not come close to "peace" or "law and order".

His repeated ignoring of court orders (contempt of court) does not show "peace" or "law and order".

I can go on and on. Don't get me started on his self-proclamation that he is the "Affordability President" (while simultaneously referring to affordability as a "Democrat hoax"). How can he be the "Affordability President", and will fix it (which he promised before the elections, too) if he believes that affordability is a hoax. Which is it, Geriatric Glutton?

Expand full comment
Arguendo's avatar

I'm worried SCOTUS will treat POTUS like a very special little boy again, like they did with their immunity case, and grant him everything he wishes.

When both SCOTUS and POTUS are compromised, the country has in effect fallen.

Expand full comment
Melanie Neilson's avatar

It's almost to the point that the lower courts should just save time for other cases and just immediately pass everything to the Supreme Court. SCOTUS seems to accept every case brought by the Administration, and too often rule against the lower courts.

Expand full comment
Jan Moon's avatar

Thank you, Allison, for explaining this clearly. I wish there were light at the end of the tunnel. But, unfortunately, I see Stephen Miller between every line. Maybe it's my pessimism rearing its ugly head again.

Expand full comment