What Brandon refers to is, I think, one way of defining the property of a district PD Shaw refers to as "compactness." To my understanding, Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964), makes equal population between electoral districts the primary and overriding mapmaking principle.
Love the history! As others have argued, I think there are more deviances than similitudes comparing the rise and seeming fall of Trumpism with this moment in American politics.
As someone who rejects both the MAGA and "Establishment" strains of Republican politics, I long for a viable, mature GOP. One with ideas of its own, of whatever degree of merit, but ideas that can be discussed with sobriety. One which has enough strength to be a viable opposition party to the Democrats and enough wisdom to know when it's time to put down the swords for fighting, and take up pen and paper to compromise. One which shares the norms of the whole country in broad strokes, is repulsed by corruption wherever it may manifest, and doesn't think it loses viability by actually participating in government.
None of that precludes it from being conservative nor requires it to buy into Democrats' proposals, only to eventually come to some sort of politically-negotiated compromise to tough issues. We need two viable parties with at least pretenses to integrity to keep one another honest. Doesn't feel like we've had that for a while now.
What we have now is perhaps closer to the Jabobins than the Jacobites -- people who have emerged out of a closed-system positive feedback loop of radicalization to the point that they aren't compatible with the real world, and somehow have wound up at the helm rather than working the oars of their party.
Finally, while I agree that the Republicans' path forward right now looks like Ron DeSantis, two years is a long time and someone else could wind up prevailing in that party's food fight.
Congress *can* pass laws like the Voting Rights Act. That means Congress has the capacity to pass a law in this arena. That does not mean that it has actually done so.
After the cases of Shelby County v. Holder (§4(b) and by logical extension §5, preclearance for historically discriminatory jurisdictions held unconstitutional as "outdated"), and Brnovich v. DNC (§2 claims of dilution of votes on racial basis to be evaluated on, effectively, a strongly deferential new standard), the two most potent provisions of the VRA are now effectively neutered. And thanks to Russo v. Common Cause, federal courts are now out of the backstopping-against-gerrymandering game, even if a political gerrymander has the practical effect of reducing the voting power of racial minorities (because black voters vote overwhelmingly Democratic, a gerrymander that reduces the voting power of Democrats but wasn't explicitly aimed at Blacks is not a Constitutional or VRA violation).
Congress has yet to pass any legislation moving into the voids left behind by Russo, Shelby County, and Brnovich. But even under the Petitioners' theory, it might choose to do so.
The VRA is a dead letter at this point. John Roberts' work in that sphere is nearly complete, having been programmed to dismantle it in any way possible and executing that mission over the course of his career not unlike the Terminator searching for Sarah Connor.
This essay has me thinking about signals of people I've grieved too. I have a corner in my house where I put up pictures and mementos of family members, whether passed on or still here. From time to time I meditate upon them, But that's a thing I go mentally out of my way to see. More immediate are my mother's paintings, which are at eye level (and bear her signature). And perhaps it's because I've not yet entered into a new relationship, but many objects around my house, although no photographs and very few mementos are direct reminders of my former marriage, an event that still causes me grief from time to time despite having built a generally happy new life for myself since then.
But as you describe, encountering stories is a qualitatively different experience than a reminder of times past. Narrative conveys a richer emotional experience than reminiscence. And in nearly any society, it becomes difficult to avoid hearing and digesting stories in some form. To tell stories, to listen to stories, to learn from them and absorb their emotional power, is hard-wired into our minds. In some ways, the part of encountering stories similar to one's own is that in stories we're presented, stories like the one in God of War, there is ultimately a resolution and an end. Real life goes on, past points where resolution or closure would be reached in a narrative, and old emotions linger even when reason says they are no longer relevant. Because reason is wrong -- they are still relevant, because they don't go away and still grip us. That is what it is to grieve -- the pain mostly recedes over time, but never all the way. It's part of how we experience our humanity.
Feels like the meat of this essay is frustration about what kind of influence on voting is permissible and appropriate, and what is not. And the line is blurry, at least in some ways. There's a reason so many candidates and campaigns run afoul of acceptance, expenditure, and disclosure rules -- and there's also a reason why so little happens at the enforcement end of those rules. A technical violation of those rules, especially if remedied by a subsequent disclosure or putting money back where it should have gone in the first place, ought not to be something that gets in between a politician campaigning and the voters who have to make up their minds about her.
At the same time, we all know that there is such a thing as corruption, although it's definitely a bigger problem for Those Other Guys than it is for My Guys, Most Of Whom Are Basically Honest Actually. Certainly it's a lot easier to see when it's going on with Those Other Guys.
I'm reminded a bit of discussions with Brits about constitutional law. "How can you Brits even have a Constitutional court deciding whether statutes are constitutional or not? You don't HAVE a Constitution!" "But we DO have a Constitution, there is a lot of general agreement bout what it is and what it allows and what it prohibits; we have so much social cohesion we don't need to write it down anywhere, you see."
Voter talks to Politician and says "I like Policy A." That's fine. Politician appears at Policy A Advocacy Group, declares for Policy A. That's fine, even if (perhaps because) Politician thinks Policy A Advocacy Group has a lot of members who will be more likely to vote for her later because of Policy A. But then National Corp, Inc. with a large branch office in Politician's District comes along and says "We believe Policy ~A is better, vote for it instead, Politician!" And then National Corp., Inc.'s executives bundle up a monetary contribution to Politician's re-election fund larger than the Policy A Advocates do, and suddenly Politician is publicly vacillating on whether she's for A or ~A. Has Politician been corrupted? Or legitimately persuaded to moderate her stance?
The real answer is, we kind of feel our way through such questions. Personal affinity and charisma of the politician can affect how we respond emotionally to things like this. (Which, come to think of it, is dangerous, since politicians are inherently in the business of being emotionally appealing.)
As for the "politicians bribing voters by giving away goodies," such has been a complaint about democracy since at least Plato. He saw two corruptions: one in the expansion of the franchise to individuals of middling status in society, taking power out of the hands of the most intelligent, most selfless, and most wise; and second in the subsequent rise of tyrannical redistributionists, who ultimately would become autocrats. Query if in today's world we generally agree that the highest-status or highest-wealth individuals to be the most intelligent, most selfless, and most wise members of our society.
Ben, this is a fascinating read and a moving one. The idea that there should be a personal connection to a monarch is foreign to my way of thinking. I love your illustration that the Queen was a hero and an exemplar to you and countless others of your fellow-British and Commonwealth citizens. This gives me a better understanding of the love for the Queen that we'e seen these past several days; thank you. May King Charles III serve his realm as well as his mother, and may you find in him, or perhaps in William, the Prince of Wales, more to admire in people who also have the peculiar job of personification of a nation.
One advantage: plenty of direct flights! When I die and go to hell (as I've been so frequently invited to do) I'm going to have to change planes in Atlanta.
If we can't have it where it's ultra-convenient for me (Portland or, grudgingly, Seattle) then as I made known to my fellow imaginary friends: New Orleans!
We spoke about this a bit at Leaguefest, but let me recapitulate here for those who weren't privy to our conversation (meaning everyone else in the world):
The basic answer is "I don't know, that goes beyond my knowledge and expertise." The more complex answer is "Low demand must, obviously, yield downward pressure on prices, but I don't really know how much that is the case." In my own case, I sublease from another attorney at a very reasonable rate for what I get and so there are several layers of insulation between me and these market forces at work.
It's also useful to note that a lot of the vacant commercial spaces the switch-to-residential proposals are aimed at are not "Class A" office space. There's issues in "Class A" buildings having vacancies too, but we're mostly talking about structures that are 80+ years old with street-level retail and not a lot of demand for anything upstairs -- especially when there is "Class A" commercial space available at affordable rates.
There's enough redacted out of here that there's just not a lot of meaningful commentary for any of us to offer. That ought to be a surprise to no one.
It is worth noting (as did Philip H above) that a privilege screen crew was on the premises during the execution of the search warrant, and (as Philip H also notes) not everything that the Trump people have been telling us about the early handling of the documents is consistent with what the Government says here. Wow. Imagine that.
I'll close with an excerpt of a mutually-exasperated conversation my father and I had in 2016 during the election. Background: my father worked on a classified military program for most of my childhood and some of my young adulthood; later in life, he worked on additional classified programs in a related field of defense. Our conversation went something like this: "Dad, you don't think Trump himself is a security risk? With his personal history? With his business networks not even being held in a blind trust if he gets elected?" "Son, all I can tell you is, if I had done what Hillary Clinton had done with her classified documents and e-mails, I'd be in jail right now. I can't possibly vote for her knowing what I know about how she dealt with our secrets."
My father is, today, outraged at the search warrant and the awful, political way that the government is treating former President Trump. Who he now says he never liked at all. Well, okay. I can see voting for someone you don't actually like, especially if you think the other plausible candidate is worse.
I wiil be arriving late Thursday night (will probably just be checking in, getting a nightcap, and going to bed) and leaving mid-day on Monday. Will be at the Hilton Old Town like other attendees.
All day Friday is free for me. We'll figure out where to meet up and perhaps enjoy a beverage or two together, perhaps explore Old Town Alexandria a bit on foot. I am going to (sadly) skip Hamilton but will (gladly) look forward to the alternative dinner, presumably also somewhere in or near Alexandria, for the non-theatergoers.
I have six (6) tickets to the International Spy Museum for 10:00 a.m. on Saturday. This is in L'Enfant Plaza and so far I think Slade and Jay have both committed to it and am saving one for Our Tod, who I believe is also going to attend (will verify with him this weekend). If he declines, that frees up a ticket. Which means there are currently two (2) extra tickets available to the first to speak up. I presume this group will collectively decide on lunch and some other activity after the Spy Museum before convening with the remainder of the group for the Big Dinner on Saturday evening.
I'm very much interested in winery-ing on Sunday. This will, I assume, take most of the day. I defer to Marchmaine (who nominate as our Virginia guide-to-gourmand-tourism) as to issues regarding transportation, vineyard selection, and what we shall do about food. These are light, and pleasant, problems to solve.
The basement thing remains a source of incredulity to me (Mar-a-Lago is directly on the Intracoastal Waterway and is less than 100 yards from the Atlantic Ocean), but okay, I'll run with it. There's a basement. Which I presume they have the Mother Of All Sump Pumps in, in addition to whatever other waterproofing got put in by the original owners.
The feds may have needed to seize documents before they got destroyed in hurricane season flooding.
Interesting bit of trivia: there's a river today called the Rubicon but it's all but certain this was not the river that Caesar crossed. No one is quite certain where that river was exactly.
This region produces some of the stinkiest (and tastiest) cheese in Italy. When in northeastern Italy, definitely seek out Sogliano al Rubicone, and get some pecorino finished in the special pit!
I understand exactly how you feel, CJColucci; I too think I'd have been a good judge, well-qualified, lawful, and fair. And like you I don't resent any of the people who got put in line ahead of me.
Oh Michael, I'm very sorry to read this. And you have my great admiration for sticking it through, making good on the promises you made so long ago. Please accept my hope that you find and maintain your strength for you, a peaceful and slowing recession for her, and my very, very best wishes for both of you.
On “SCOTUS and Moore v Harper: To Be Democratic Or To Seem Democratic”
What Brandon refers to is, I think, one way of defining the property of a district PD Shaw refers to as "compactness." To my understanding, Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964), makes equal population between electoral districts the primary and overriding mapmaking principle.
On “The King Over the Water”
Love the history! As others have argued, I think there are more deviances than similitudes comparing the rise and seeming fall of Trumpism with this moment in American politics.
As someone who rejects both the MAGA and "Establishment" strains of Republican politics, I long for a viable, mature GOP. One with ideas of its own, of whatever degree of merit, but ideas that can be discussed with sobriety. One which has enough strength to be a viable opposition party to the Democrats and enough wisdom to know when it's time to put down the swords for fighting, and take up pen and paper to compromise. One which shares the norms of the whole country in broad strokes, is repulsed by corruption wherever it may manifest, and doesn't think it loses viability by actually participating in government.
None of that precludes it from being conservative nor requires it to buy into Democrats' proposals, only to eventually come to some sort of politically-negotiated compromise to tough issues. We need two viable parties with at least pretenses to integrity to keep one another honest. Doesn't feel like we've had that for a while now.
What we have now is perhaps closer to the Jabobins than the Jacobites -- people who have emerged out of a closed-system positive feedback loop of radicalization to the point that they aren't compatible with the real world, and somehow have wound up at the helm rather than working the oars of their party.
Finally, while I agree that the Republicans' path forward right now looks like Ron DeSantis, two years is a long time and someone else could wind up prevailing in that party's food fight.
On “SCOTUS and Moore v Harper: To Be Democratic Or To Seem Democratic”
Apologies, I must have been unclear about that.
Congress *can* pass laws like the Voting Rights Act. That means Congress has the capacity to pass a law in this arena. That does not mean that it has actually done so.
After the cases of Shelby County v. Holder (§4(b) and by logical extension §5, preclearance for historically discriminatory jurisdictions held unconstitutional as "outdated"), and Brnovich v. DNC (§2 claims of dilution of votes on racial basis to be evaluated on, effectively, a strongly deferential new standard), the two most potent provisions of the VRA are now effectively neutered. And thanks to Russo v. Common Cause, federal courts are now out of the backstopping-against-gerrymandering game, even if a political gerrymander has the practical effect of reducing the voting power of racial minorities (because black voters vote overwhelmingly Democratic, a gerrymander that reduces the voting power of Democrats but wasn't explicitly aimed at Blacks is not a Constitutional or VRA violation).
Congress has yet to pass any legislation moving into the voids left behind by Russo, Shelby County, and Brnovich. But even under the Petitioners' theory, it might choose to do so.
"
...See the last sentence of section VII.
"
It's not. Or rather, it wasn't.
The VRA is a dead letter at this point. John Roberts' work in that sphere is nearly complete, having been programmed to dismantle it in any way possible and executing that mission over the course of his career not unlike the Terminator searching for Sarah Connor.
On “Playing God of War As A Grieving Parent”
This essay has me thinking about signals of people I've grieved too. I have a corner in my house where I put up pictures and mementos of family members, whether passed on or still here. From time to time I meditate upon them, But that's a thing I go mentally out of my way to see. More immediate are my mother's paintings, which are at eye level (and bear her signature). And perhaps it's because I've not yet entered into a new relationship, but many objects around my house, although no photographs and very few mementos are direct reminders of my former marriage, an event that still causes me grief from time to time despite having built a generally happy new life for myself since then.
But as you describe, encountering stories is a qualitatively different experience than a reminder of times past. Narrative conveys a richer emotional experience than reminiscence. And in nearly any society, it becomes difficult to avoid hearing and digesting stories in some form. To tell stories, to listen to stories, to learn from them and absorb their emotional power, is hard-wired into our minds. In some ways, the part of encountering stories similar to one's own is that in stories we're presented, stories like the one in God of War, there is ultimately a resolution and an end. Real life goes on, past points where resolution or closure would be reached in a narrative, and old emotions linger even when reason says they are no longer relevant. Because reason is wrong -- they are still relevant, because they don't go away and still grip us. That is what it is to grieve -- the pain mostly recedes over time, but never all the way. It's part of how we experience our humanity.
I wish you strength and love, my friend.
On “The 3/5th Compromise & James Madison’s Crystal Flute”
But once Lizzo played it, it was like cosmic justice or something.
(Seriously I LOL'd to this.)
On “Presidential Monday Trivia”
Good, obscure trivia Will!
On “Ten Second News Links and Open Thread for the week of 10/10/22”
Have faith, comrade. This shall flush out all who will be made subject to shadow deplatforming. For the good of the collective, of course.
On “A Vote”
Feels like the meat of this essay is frustration about what kind of influence on voting is permissible and appropriate, and what is not. And the line is blurry, at least in some ways. There's a reason so many candidates and campaigns run afoul of acceptance, expenditure, and disclosure rules -- and there's also a reason why so little happens at the enforcement end of those rules. A technical violation of those rules, especially if remedied by a subsequent disclosure or putting money back where it should have gone in the first place, ought not to be something that gets in between a politician campaigning and the voters who have to make up their minds about her.
At the same time, we all know that there is such a thing as corruption, although it's definitely a bigger problem for Those Other Guys than it is for My Guys, Most Of Whom Are Basically Honest Actually. Certainly it's a lot easier to see when it's going on with Those Other Guys.
I'm reminded a bit of discussions with Brits about constitutional law. "How can you Brits even have a Constitutional court deciding whether statutes are constitutional or not? You don't HAVE a Constitution!" "But we DO have a Constitution, there is a lot of general agreement bout what it is and what it allows and what it prohibits; we have so much social cohesion we don't need to write it down anywhere, you see."
Voter talks to Politician and says "I like Policy A." That's fine. Politician appears at Policy A Advocacy Group, declares for Policy A. That's fine, even if (perhaps because) Politician thinks Policy A Advocacy Group has a lot of members who will be more likely to vote for her later because of Policy A. But then National Corp, Inc. with a large branch office in Politician's District comes along and says "We believe Policy ~A is better, vote for it instead, Politician!" And then National Corp., Inc.'s executives bundle up a monetary contribution to Politician's re-election fund larger than the Policy A Advocates do, and suddenly Politician is publicly vacillating on whether she's for A or ~A. Has Politician been corrupted? Or legitimately persuaded to moderate her stance?
The real answer is, we kind of feel our way through such questions. Personal affinity and charisma of the politician can affect how we respond emotionally to things like this. (Which, come to think of it, is dangerous, since politicians are inherently in the business of being emotionally appealing.)
As for the "politicians bribing voters by giving away goodies," such has been a complaint about democracy since at least Plato. He saw two corruptions: one in the expansion of the franchise to individuals of middling status in society, taking power out of the hands of the most intelligent, most selfless, and most wise; and second in the subsequent rise of tyrannical redistributionists, who ultimately would become autocrats. Query if in today's world we generally agree that the highest-status or highest-wealth individuals to be the most intelligent, most selfless, and most wise members of our society.
On “10 Seconds With The Queen”
Ben, this is a fascinating read and a moving one. The idea that there should be a personal connection to a monarch is foreign to my way of thinking. I love your illustration that the Queen was a hero and an exemplar to you and countless others of your fellow-British and Commonwealth citizens. This gives me a better understanding of the love for the Queen that we'e seen these past several days; thank you. May King Charles III serve his realm as well as his mother, and may you find in him, or perhaps in William, the Prince of Wales, more to admire in people who also have the peculiar job of personification of a nation.
On “Real Help From Imaginary Friends”
One advantage: plenty of direct flights! When I die and go to hell (as I've been so frequently invited to do) I'm going to have to change planes in Atlanta.
"
If we can't have it where it's ultra-convenient for me (Portland or, grudgingly, Seattle) then as I made known to my fellow imaginary friends: New Orleans!
On “The Return of the Elk”
We spoke about this a bit at Leaguefest, but let me recapitulate here for those who weren't privy to our conversation (meaning everyone else in the world):
The basic answer is "I don't know, that goes beyond my knowledge and expertise." The more complex answer is "Low demand must, obviously, yield downward pressure on prices, but I don't really know how much that is the case." In my own case, I sublease from another attorney at a very reasonable rate for what I get and so there are several layers of insulation between me and these market forces at work.
It's also useful to note that a lot of the vacant commercial spaces the switch-to-residential proposals are aimed at are not "Class A" office space. There's issues in "Class A" buildings having vacancies too, but we're mostly talking about structures that are 80+ years old with street-level retail and not a lot of demand for anything upstairs -- especially when there is "Class A" commercial space available at affordable rates.
On “Justice Department Details “Obstructive Conduct” in Mar-a-Lago Search Response”
This lawyer?
https://www.npr.org/2022/08/31/1120314031/justice-department-filing-on-mar-a-lago-documents-puts-trumps-lawyers-in-focus
Or this one?
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/31/trump-lawyer-john-eastman-takes-fifth-at-georgia-grand-jury.html
Or these ones? Because they don't want to be his lawyers.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/08/16/trump-lawyers-fbi-raid/
And I don't blame them.
On “Leaguefest: I Have Some Questions”
Two tickets spoken for now, with you and Lady Marchmaine. One left! Em? Will? Greg?
I suggest you reserve for six. Two or three wineries would probably be more than enough. And yes, let's get dinner!
On “The Mar-a-Lago Affidavit: Read It For Yourself”
There's enough redacted out of here that there's just not a lot of meaningful commentary for any of us to offer. That ought to be a surprise to no one.
It is worth noting (as did Philip H above) that a privilege screen crew was on the premises during the execution of the search warrant, and (as Philip H also notes) not everything that the Trump people have been telling us about the early handling of the documents is consistent with what the Government says here. Wow. Imagine that.
I'll close with an excerpt of a mutually-exasperated conversation my father and I had in 2016 during the election. Background: my father worked on a classified military program for most of my childhood and some of my young adulthood; later in life, he worked on additional classified programs in a related field of defense. Our conversation went something like this: "Dad, you don't think Trump himself is a security risk? With his personal history? With his business networks not even being held in a blind trust if he gets elected?" "Son, all I can tell you is, if I had done what Hillary Clinton had done with her classified documents and e-mails, I'd be in jail right now. I can't possibly vote for her knowing what I know about how she dealt with our secrets."
My father is, today, outraged at the search warrant and the awful, political way that the government is treating former President Trump. Who he now says he never liked at all. Well, okay. I can see voting for someone you don't actually like, especially if you think the other plausible candidate is worse.
On “Leaguefest: I Have Some Questions”
I wiil be arriving late Thursday night (will probably just be checking in, getting a nightcap, and going to bed) and leaving mid-day on Monday. Will be at the Hilton Old Town like other attendees.
All day Friday is free for me. We'll figure out where to meet up and perhaps enjoy a beverage or two together, perhaps explore Old Town Alexandria a bit on foot. I am going to (sadly) skip Hamilton but will (gladly) look forward to the alternative dinner, presumably also somewhere in or near Alexandria, for the non-theatergoers.
I have six (6) tickets to the International Spy Museum for 10:00 a.m. on Saturday. This is in L'Enfant Plaza and so far I think Slade and Jay have both committed to it and am saving one for Our Tod, who I believe is also going to attend (will verify with him this weekend). If he declines, that frees up a ticket. Which means there are currently two (2) extra tickets available to the first to speak up. I presume this group will collectively decide on lunch and some other activity after the Spy Museum before convening with the remainder of the group for the Big Dinner on Saturday evening.
I'm very much interested in winery-ing on Sunday. This will, I assume, take most of the day. I defer to Marchmaine (who nominate as our Virginia guide-to-gourmand-tourism) as to issues regarding transportation, vineyard selection, and what we shall do about food. These are light, and pleasant, problems to solve.
Will very much miss meeting you in person, North!
On “Trump Files Lawsuit Over Mar-a-Lago Search and Seizure”
I had an appointment cancel on my today. So as proof of my love, I annotated the motion. Well, the first sixteen pages of it, anyway, before I ran out of time and had to leave to meet friends for pub trivia tonight. Enjoy.
On “Providing Opportunities To Form A Misunderstood And Insincere Patriotism”
No that was $90K to listen to it and endure a bunch of bullshit afterwards. Was it worth it?
On “The Losing of One’s Mind Online: Mar-a-Lago Search Warrant Edition”
The basement thing remains a source of incredulity to me (Mar-a-Lago is directly on the Intracoastal Waterway and is less than 100 yards from the Atlantic Ocean), but okay, I'll run with it. There's a basement. Which I presume they have the Mother Of All Sump Pumps in, in addition to whatever other waterproofing got put in by the original owners.
The feds may have needed to seize documents before they got destroyed in hurricane season flooding.
"
Interesting bit of trivia: there's a river today called the Rubicon but it's all but certain this was not the river that Caesar crossed. No one is quite certain where that river was exactly.
This region produces some of the stinkiest (and tastiest) cheese in Italy. When in northeastern Italy, definitely seek out Sogliano al Rubicone, and get some pecorino finished in the special pit!
"
I understand exactly how you feel, CJColucci; I too think I'd have been a good judge, well-qualified, lawful, and fair. And like you I don't resent any of the people who got put in line ahead of me.
"
There are basements in Florida homes?
On “Thursday Throughput: Uhura Edition”
Oh Michael, I'm very sorry to read this. And you have my great admiration for sticking it through, making good on the promises you made so long ago. Please accept my hope that you find and maintain your strength for you, a peaceful and slowing recession for her, and my very, very best wishes for both of you.