She also makes a point we don't hear enough, but it is obvious:

Trying to moderate on immigration will extend the power of fascism indefinitely. We need a new moral approach that actually confronts the scapegoating and atrocities that fuel authoritarianism.

Expansion of the Court could be accomplished by a simple majority in both houses of Congress. Impeachment and removal of the justices would require 2/3 majority of the Senate, meaning you'd need about 15-17 Republicans to vote to impeach. You're never gonna get that level of Republican buy-in.

i also don’t know what it means to have “no policy legacy,” but whatever it is i imagine the families of the civilians killed in Iran and the millions of people deprived of aid here and abroad would disagree

Is there a type of error that *isn't* poorly-suited for harmless error analysis?

that said, that’s just the risk you absorb when you are willing to take a big swing, and it’s refreshing to see someone not shy away from it

Year by year, piece by piece, dismantling Kalief's Law, slipping in loopholes or allowances for "judicial discretion" which always simply means allowing judges to put people in cages more often.

New York's 2019 discovery and bail reform law was originally referred to as Kalief's Law, and in its original form had the effect of substantially holding prosecutors to account and keeping most defendants out of pre-trial detention. In the years since, Hochul has walked back most of that progress.

and would have the side effect of dramatically reducing the friction people feel when they interact with the criminal justice system, both as victims and defendants.

like, there are actually shows being canceled, you dont need a hypothetical thought experiment about the woke left, it is actually happening right now right in front of you