U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta today sentenced the leader of the right-wing Oath Keepers organization, Elmer Stewart Rhodes III, to 18 years in prison, followed by 3 years of supervised release. In November a jury found Rhodes guilty of seditious conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, and tampering with documents and proceedings, for his role in organizing people to go to Washington in January 2021 and try to stop the counting of the electoral votes that would make Joe Biden president.
Agree, 100%. And if our wetlands disappear, what happens to the wildlife that lives there? This, coupled with climate change, is incredibly frightening to me.
I saw that 900 different species live in wetlands all over the country. While we might want to propose that states take over regulating our wetlands, it turns out that about half of the stats have laws on the books stating that they cannot impose stricter regulations than the EPA, so when the Court destroys the federal government's regulations, they are also effective preventing the states from taking over. I keep wondering if any of the Justices have children or grandchildren and why they're not concerned about the planet subsequent generations will be inheriting.
They're willing to destroy the world we all live in/on. The delusion is that their money can buy them exemption from reality. Good luck with that.
I heard this reported on NPR yesterday, while driving. My first thought wasn't Houston, but Southern Louisiana and Katrina. People are having to be relocated because the very land they've lived on for generations is being inudated. But then, they're poor people, mostly, so who cares, right, Alito?
The destruction of the planet is also connected to a specific Evangelical/ Dominionist ideology. They believe that only once the planet is in ruins, Jesus can return. Thousands of Christian officials in all levels of government believe this. This brand of policymaking has been going on at least since Caspar Weinberger, who believed protecting the environment didn't matter, because the rapture was upon us. It's complete mental illness. If there was one test for office, it should be that Armageddonists cannot hold office.
I think you are right, Holly. I wish I could wave a wand to remove the delusion of supremacy from human beings. Until we recognize that we are simply a part of nature and respect it, we are doomed.
I once asked one of these "Armageddonists" how they would know the real Jesus when He comes to Earth again. "Well," he said, "I'll know it's the real Jesus when he confirms His Message in the Bible." "What if He wants to give you a new Message? What if He says something like, 'Now for Chapter 2 of the New Testament!'?" "Then I'll know it's a false Christ and we'll have to kill him" (The fact that we were conversing in the pitch darkness of a Cub Scout cavern campout trip late at night in NW Georgia made it even creepier.)
It's sad -- even Jesus Himself can't tell them anything new.
Wow. This about Christian officials is new to me. It does make sense that something had to be behind it besides just ... what? Religious fervor, in my opinion, is emotionally damaged people looking for black-and-white answers, and it puts too many of them in the position of continually being manipulated.
Pouring dirt on your lot to level it out before you build is destroying the planet? There lot was near ditch, that was near creek, which was near a lake.
The sanctimonious lecturing is unbelievable.
BTW the court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacketts. I'll bet you didn't know that before you virtued signaled about the planet.
By 5-4 the Majority asked Congress to tighten their language on the term wet lands to lessen litigation.
The case was about an Idaho couple s Michael and Chantell Sackett who purchased property near
Priest Lake, Idaho, and began backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare
for building a home. The Environmental Protection Agency informed
the Sacketts that their property contained wetlands and that their
backfilling violated the Clean Water Act, which prohibits discharging
pollutants into “the waters of the United States.” 33 U. S. C. §1362(7).
The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day. The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as “waters of the United States” because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not “waters of the United States.”
AGAIN the Sackets poured DIRT near a ditch, which was near a creek, which was near lake.
ONLY A MORON or Climate activist would would believe this is damaging the enviroment or that it violated the CLEAN WATERS ACT.
The Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacket's
As a separate question the Court disagreed over the language of what constitutes wetlands. By a 5-4 margin the Majority argued the definition language was causing litigation and that Congress needed to tighten up the language.
IT IS A DISGRACFUL that the Supreme Court is accused gutting the EPA, or harming the environment.
It took me 5 minutes of research to see this who post was a LIE. It speaks to the LAZINESS and DISHONESTY of Heather and her acolytes that they did no homework.
Katrina was bad and really hard on lower income folks. I was part of a church group that made three 1 week repair efforts. Because I was qualified I did mostly rewiring of homes. In many cases the original wiring was terrible but we could fix that what was harder was helping the people deal with the hell they had gone through. About half of our group just spent time with folks listening to what they had been through.
Having spent more that 30 years working in heavy industry dealing with the EPA and OHSA wasn't always easy but both are critical to our personal and collective future.
The Supreme Court must be fixed. Not easy but we the people have to get this done starting now for the 2024 election.
Hopefully, fixing the Supreme Court is next on the Biden agenda. Soon as we get past this debt ceiling debacle. I think Joe Biden will be remembered as the best US President in American history!
That was my first thought too along with the destruction of mangrove swamps in other places. Poor people, why should the wealthy and their minions in government even give them a thought.
The case was about an Idaho couple s Michael and Chantell Sackett who purchased property near
Priest Lake, Idaho, and began backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare
for building a home. The Environmental Protection Agency informed
the Sacketts that their property contained wetlands and that their
backfilling violated the Clean Water Act, which prohibits discharging
pollutants into “the waters of the United States.” 33 U. S. C. §1362(7).
The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day. The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as “waters of the United States” because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not “waters of the United States.”
AGAIN the Sackets poured DIRT near a ditch, which was near a creek, which was near lake.
ONLY A MORON or Climate activist would would believe this is damaging the enviroment or that it violated the CLEAN WATERS ACT.
The Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacket's
As a separate question the Court disagreed over the language of what constitutes wetlands. By a 5-4 margin the Majority argued the definition language was causing litigation and that Congress needed to tighten up the language.
IT IS A DISGRACFUL that the Supreme Court is accused of gutting the EPA, or harming the environment.
It took me 5 minutes of research to see this who post was a LIE. It speaks to the LAZINESS and DISHONESTY of Heather and her acolytes that they did no homework.
Sandra, I lived there, watching oil barges destroy the wetlands and the shrimp and oysters of those who had made their living supplying them and eating them for two centuries (and maybe longer). I knew a Corps of Engineers guy whose life was destroyed by his love of his state and his inability to bear what was happening to its core.
Thank you, Virginia. I left Florida for much the same reason. Total enactment of Joni Mitchell's Big Yellow Taxi (aka: They Paved Paradise and Put Up a Parking Lot)
Indeed. And subsidize their flood insurance. North Carolina's coast is a good example. They're beginning to question allowing people to build right up to the water's edge (Rodanthe)!! At least two houses have disappeared into the drink so far this year. Barrier islands are, almost by definition, impermanent.
I am remembering that many of those living in Southern LA were living in lowlands that had to be reclaimed as marsh to restore the natural ecology. it is my understanding that they should not be returning to lands that they lived on even for generations, lands that need to be restored as marsh to absorb the waters coming downstream. Correct me if you please. The same is true on the others coasts as we get into more climate change.
This ruling was made for, and by, corporations. It is the essence of fascism. I am sure, even without doing the research, that the people who destroyed these wetlands in Idaho weren’t just building a porch. They also probably don’t vote for the Democratic Party. (fixed)
Of course they will and they will want government help. Water already is a problem in the West and it's only going to get worse. We are lucky here in Oregon that we got a good snow pack this year. There have been years when we haven't.
I sure you didn't bother to read the opinion? Its embarrassing how many people on this site didn't do their homework.
Let's stop lying about the POST
DID YOU READ THE RULING? Of course not.
It was a 9-0 ruling on the merits.
The case was about an Idaho couple s Michael and Chantell Sackett who purchased property near
Priest Lake, Idaho, and began backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare
for building a home. The Environmental Protection Agency informed
the Sacketts that their property contained wetlands and that their
backfilling violated the Clean Water Act, which prohibits discharging
pollutants into “the waters of the United States.” 33 U. S. C. §1362(7).
The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day. The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as “waters of the United States” because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not “waters of the United States.”
AGAIN the Sackets poured DIRT near a ditch, which was near a creek, which was near lake.
ONLY A MORON or Climate activist would would believe this is damaging the enviroment or that it violated the CLEAN WATERS ACT.
The Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacket's
As a separate question the Court disagreed over the language of what constitutes wetlands. By a 5-4 margin the Majority argued the definition language was causing litigation and that Congress needed to tighten up the language.
IT IS A DISGRACFUL that the Supreme Court is accused of gutting the EPA, or harming the environment.
It took me 5 minutes of research to see this who post was a LIE. It speaks to the LAZINESS and DISHONESTY of Heather and her acolytes that they did no homework.
Fascism? That's when the FBI lies to America about Trump collusion when it was the narrative was bankrolled by The Clinton Campaign or when the CIA/FBI lie about The Hunter Biden laptop. That's fascism.
Its also fascism when you blatantly lie about THE SUPREME COURT ruling.
Did you think NO ONE would check? Even read the opinion?
Let's stop lying about the POST
DID YOU READ THE RULING? Of course not.
It was a 9-0 ruling on the merits.
The case was about an Idaho couple s Michael and Chantell Sackett who purchased property near
Priest Lake, Idaho, and began backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare
for building a home. The Environmental Protection Agency informed
the Sacketts that their property contained wetlands and that their
backfilling violated the Clean Water Act, which prohibits discharging
pollutants into “the waters of the United States.” 33 U. S. C. §1362(7).
The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day. The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as “waters of the United States” because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not “waters of the United States.”
AGAIN the Sackets poured DIRT near a ditch, which was near a creek, which was near lake.
ONLY A MORON or Climate activist would would believe this is damaging the environment or that it violated the CLEAN WATERS ACT.
The Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacket's
As a separate question the Court disagreed over the language of what constitutes wetlands. By a 5-4 margin the Majority argued the definition language was causing litigation and that Congress needed to tighten up the language.
IT IS A DISGRACFUL that the Supreme Court is accused of gutting the EPA, or harming the environment.
It took me 5 minutes of research to see this who post was a LIE. It speaks to the LAZINESS and DISHONESTY of Heather and her acolytes that they did no homework.
Precisely. They are all part of the hydrologic system, and the hydrologic cycle which fills them. And much is underground, in the form of aquifers which are fed by these systems. It's sheer stupidity to believe otherwise.
And to read how farming has now drained the aquifers west of the Rocky Mountains is appalling. I read just last night about sheep farmers in Colorado who have depended on the Colorado River and the attendant aquifers that have been drained in the recent drought and how they are no longer able to irrigate the vast pastures on which they depend.
Sheep farmers may plant grains or vegetables if they get their water back. Ecologically that’s what the EU is doing in hopes of alleviating starvation caused by climate change (caused by pollution).
Yes. I believe this is relatively true too. Whatever bad comes their wealth will shield them from the worst, and therefore they don't care. I also don't really believe they care about their grandchildren or offspring that much. Everyone used to say that the Nazis were mean to Jews and nice to their own families, but I believe that was not true. I think they were mean to everyone. The same is true here. Nicer, but not nice. They don't know how to be caring because they don't care. Caring people steward the planet.
I think a malignant narcissist can treat you very well until you no longer please them, which can just be a matter of whim. Look at how suddenly and completely Trump turns on former allies? We are just toys in their toybox. That's not empathy. Lincoln said "As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy." I think that as he often did, he nailed it, and it that it fair to extend that concept beyond slaver per se to domineering. Yes, we cannot tolerate predatory approaches to to human relations, which is the point, but it's a problem even at the level of family and well as a despotic state. I think we all have the potential to abuse our power over others, and violence occurs in many forms. We also, of necessity, pursue self-interest, but (mostly) temper that urge with conscience and/or compassion.
Yet we all possess a deep survival-oriented "reptile" brain, that has a high degree of veto power over "better angels", and would-be despots exploit that. We see it in the news every day. I think we all have potential for instances of "reptile" behavior, but I think that kids who have been terrified into submission by authoritarian parents are more likely to regard that as normative, and more readily embrace tyrants.
The case was about an Idaho couple s Michael and Chantell Sackett who purchased property near
Priest Lake, Idaho, and began backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare
for building a home. The Environmental Protection Agency informed
the Sacketts that their property contained wetlands and that their
backfilling violated the Clean Water Act, which prohibits discharging
pollutants into “the waters of the United States.” 33 U. S. C. §1362(7).
The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day. The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as “waters of the United States” because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not “waters of the United States.”
AGAIN the Sackets poured DIRT near a ditch, which was near a creek, which was near lake.
ONLY A MORON or Climate activist would would believe this is damaging the enviroment or that it violated the CLEAN WATERS ACT.
The Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacket's
As a separate question the Court disagreed over the language of what constitutes wetlands. By a 5-4 margin the Majority argued the definition language was causing litigation and that Congress needed to tighten up the language.
IT IS A DISGRACFUL that the Supreme Court is gutting the EPA, or harming the environment.
It took me 5 minutes of research to see this who post was a LIE. It speaks to the LAZINESS and DISHONESTY of Heather and her acolytes that they did no homework.
James, in spite of your hostility, I appreciate that you did prompt me to read much of the split decision opinion, and look at the disagreements between the justices. For you to act like this is obviously an idiotic thing for people to be disturbed about seems rather strange. None of us know how many millions of acres of wetlands may now become more polluted.
A point Justice Kagan made here is that having a law (passed, BTW, in a bipartisan manner in Congress) be "broad" does not mean that it is "vague". Thus saying "there's a need to use much clearer language", is BS, to her thinking in this case. Congress in 1972 INTENDED for the power of the EPA to be broad.
The five justices taking upon themselves to redefine what should be the limits of the Clean Water Act , based on "clarity of language", is at least very questionable. Whatever happened to the idea that activist judges were an anathema to conservatives?
From an ecological standpoint, you tell us what makes more sense: a) water that sometimes flows into other water should NOT be regulated because there's not a "continuous" connection "on the surface", or b) water that connects to larger bodies of water either underground or part of the year can have major downstream environmental safety effects? Why was Justice Kavanaugh willing to split from the 5 "shrink the federal govt" zealots on this?
Dude. You posted this seven times and then I got bored and quit counting. Switch to decaf.
On the issue itself, it is not moronic to insist people obey the law on wetlands. The Sacketts did not and were properly sanctioned. At the time of their action, their backfill DID violate the Clean Water Act. And contrary to your sneering, backfilling wetlands does damage the environment, by making it more difficult of us to manage floods and recharge aquifers.
SCOTUS made the illegal legal. Fine, that's SCOTUS' job. So the Sacketts can proceed. I hope others use this decision to understand the value of keeping wetlands intact on their property whenever possible. It helps us all.
Please call them “Radical.” They are not conservative. “Conservatives” conserve. Radicals destroy. Keep thinking of the French mob and that of January 6th.
Agreed. In fact, given the recent revelation that the Catholic Church in Illinois has almost 2000 additional cases of clergy abusing children that has been unreported since 1950, I have been wondering why we allow churches tax exemptions and nonProfit status at all. How is that separation of church and state? I personally think the Catholic church should be shut down it is doing so much harm. Their infiltration into the health care services and taking over of hospitals all over the country, has made it difficult for women to get birth control or abortions or any health procedure connected to stem cell research even in states that do not place restrictions on any of these activities. The Opus Dei/ Federalist Society is a well organized mob like danger to our nation. They are terrorists in their actions.
Linda, read Playing God: American Catholic Bishops and the Far Right, by Mary Jo McConahay. Excellent look at how this has all unfolded. Not so much the clerical abuse but the roots of the religious right and the involvement of wealthy Catholic conservatives who finance the partisan politics of the mostly anti- Pope Francis Bishops. I think they have crossed the church/state separation line many times in recent years.
The case was about an Idaho couple s Michael and Chantell Sackett who purchased property near
Priest Lake, Idaho, and began backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare
for building a home. The Environmental Protection Agency informed
the Sacketts that their property contained wetlands and that their
backfilling violated the Clean Water Act, which prohibits discharging
pollutants into “the waters of the United States.” 33 U. S. C. §1362(7).
The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day. The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as “waters of the United States” because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not “waters of the United States.”
AGAIN the Sackets poured DIRT near a ditch, which was near a creek, which was near lake.
ONLY A MORON or Climate activist would would believe this is damaging the enviroment or that it violated the CLEAN WATERS ACT.
The Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacket's
As a separate question the Court disagreed over the language of what constitutes wetlands. By a 5-4 margin the Majority argued the definition language was causing litigation and that Congress needed to tighten up the language.
IT IS A DISGRACFUL that the Supreme Court is gutting the EPA, or harming the environment.
It took me 5 minutes of research to see this who post was a LIE. It speaks to the LAZINESS and DISHONESTY of Heather and her acolytes that they did no homework.
Pig farms near or in wild bird habitat. What could go wrong? Epidemiologist have traced the 1918 Pandemic to Haskil KS where wild migratory birds came into contact with pig livestock. Horses, pigs, birds are reservoirs of influenza. Each ring is like a layered defense for us humans. The biggest danger to our immunity is when a novel strain skips a species and starts kills humans. Without wet lands we loose our layered defense. The supreme courts decision has National Security ramifications. Too bad federalist society libertarians have not read a book.
I would expect that a higher level of proof will be required to demonstrate that ground waters are affected by manure runoff or pcb seepage from industrial scale feedlots and "private" industrial disposal sites. This is quite a terrifying decision as it will be cited in favor of open dumping, strip mining, oils waste, and you name whatever private sector enterprise that produces toxins from extraction through production through recycling and disposal. Next to clean air protections, safe water has been sacrosanct since the 1970s. Damn. Maybe I should open up that acreage I have been maintaining as pristine valley and forest to folks willing to pay for someplace out in rural America to truck in waste and nasty stuff as my lowlands are not contiguous to any surface streams or waterways. Can imagine the brouhaha that'd come up at town meetings and raised with Wisconsin DNR, though DNR no longer can in estimate private property issues.
They are so important in helping the damage caused by extreme weather as well. The Stench Court and their sponsors are so greedy that they think their money will save them from the destruction they are aiding and abetting. Once again I am thankful I am as old as I am with no direct descendants.
I understand and I just turned 80. I now have ex-students who are considering not having children or have stopped at one. These problems with climate change have been obvious for a long time to those who have been paying attention. Then there is my sister's family....I am great great aunt to at least ten or possibly more kids.
Someday our people of child-bearing age who want children will begin to adopt the millions of orphans that war and climate change have left unprotected. May the day come sooner rather than later. It will take changes in adoption laws, but if we can get a Democratic “wave” in ‘24 and another in ‘28, some thinking about the future might just take place. (Republicans currently seem incapable of thought.)
It's impossible to allow private parties to backfill or pollute their "private property" without it affecting the ground water many miles away. I'm sure the SC knows this but doesn't care. They've proven time and again that they care about nothing and nobody.
We on Cape Cod understand that all of our water comes from our single-source aquifer. Right now, one fight is to deny permits for a machine gun range that will pollute our aquifer. The other fight is to keep Holtec, the company decommissioning the Pilgrim Nuclear Plant, from dumping a million gallons of contaminated water in Cape Cod Bay. The greed of both companies and individuals seems boundless and their understanding of the consequences of their proposed actions is non-existent.
In Indiana District 8 last year we had Ray McCormick a Democrat run against Larry Bucshon a Republican. One of Ray's talking points was saving the wetlands. He grew up on a farm in Southern Indiana and continues to farm. He had also worked under the Obama administration. He would have been an asset whereas....we have do nothing no show Bucshon. He is show up for the tornado that devastated Sullivan, IN and and the photo opps with do nothing Todd Young! I am sure we paid for their trip to walk around Sullivan. Yep! Indiana is a RED STATE! I cry!
I think they are completely wedded to a rigid and outdated worldview that values man and money above everything and everyone else. They simply do not care about anything else.
but also show once again like Dobbs they think themselves well enough educated and qualified to rule on technical issues well (no pun intended) outside areas remotely within their expertise. Any college graduate or possibly even high school student exposed to even a smudgeon of ecology or environmental studies would understand the connectedness of waterways of all shapes and konds within an ecosystem. But no the folks who passed that decision would not have passed an elementary (ahem) science test on the subject. I guess they’re confident of being experts on everything that comes their way. Egregious.
The conservative judges are pro-business and without regulations businesses only care about profit. Profits over people, environment, climate. They couldn't care less. I guess they figure they will be pushing daisies by the time the chickens come home to roost. The irony is that most of those CEOs had to have been part of the environmental movement in the 70s. But let us not forget that they can rationalize anything to justify their greed.
The entire "Republican" Party is now completely owned by sociopathic avarice. Anything is up for sacrifice if it satisfies the obsessive greed of their patrons.
I was wondering what elemennts create Stuart Rhodes, and recalling how a returned Viet Nam vet sprang out of bed and was on his feet, pointing a gun at his mother who had tapped on his door to call him to breakfast. Stuart Rhodes is also a US military graduate:
This Court is WAY overstepping ing its bounds. It is nullifying laws passed by Congress and signed by the President, essentially making themselves an unelected cabal with little accountability. I would refer everyone to The Hartmann Report written by Thom Hartmann, on Substack. He does an excellent job of explaining how the radical justices are overstepping the bounds of the Court, that Congress can regulate it as Congress "created" the Court using the parameters listed in the Constitution. Ironically, the SCOTUS says it can't regulate political gerrymandering, but can regulate decisions of Congress protecting the common good of the country. At least 5 of them should be impeached for corruption.
I am at least somewhat relieved to hear we may have recourse against the ignorance,greed, and corruption of this court. We have pandered to business so much over the past forty years that this is what we get--Existential threats to health, education, welfare, and the common good.
There is no safeguards for any of us, our way of life or our future. SCOTUS has become a Republican instrument of what appears to be our Democracy’s demise
Well, when? When? When?????? After all our water is undrinkable? We have let the most foul ideology pollute our government. Must we tolerate such idiocy . We refuse. We refuse we refuse!!!!! Must we allow fouling our own drinking water? Is this truly sane?
We got rid of Kings! Now get rid of Supreme Court delusion... we have simply given the reins to lunatics.
Are we just going to sit back and blather, or are we really demanding that our laws rule. Not the other way around. 😱☠️
Yes, birds nest and raise their young in wetlands. A Sand County Almanac is a classic, much like Rachel Carson's books about the seashore, except it is inland.
YES! I have a family of sandhill cranes in my neighborhood (SE Michigan). My home abuts a wonderful wetland. Today - again - I thank the voters of Michigan for our wonderful leaders here.
This is just horrifying. As if birds and other wildlife aren’t already under threat due to development, the use of pesticides, and so on. Why do these people want to destroy the earth?!
What happens to wildlife effects our natural protection from “spillover” as well. Wetlands serve us in more than one way. Both 1918 and 2020 Pandemics demonstrate these facts.
THIS IS TOO STUPID TO BELIEVE. Did you read the ruling?
The Sackets were back filling a lot with dirt, near a ditch, which fed creek, which fed into a lake. Not only is this NOT covered by the CLEAN WATERS ACT, Its utter STUPID to believe that pouring DIRT on your lot to level it out for building IS DESTROYING WETLANDS.
The Court agreed 9-0
In a seperate issue, they disagreed (5-4) about whether Congress needed to clarify its
language what constituted CLEAN WATERS of the US. The majority felt that the ambiguous language was causing litigation. THEY asked Congress to tighten up its LANGUAGE.
Its A LIE that this is destroying American wetland or gutting the EPA.
What I don't get is why, when nine unelected people rule, we all just have to throw up our hands and say, "OK, whatever you say, boss." What would happen if the feds just ignored the court on this?
In New Jersey, we have our own wetlands protection act, and state EPA, so this will not affect our state, for now. ( I hope).The decision by the SCOTUS does set the stage for weakening our rules, should our state GOP, gain control here. ( not likely) Local activism brought about our own protections and I hope other states follow as well.
Jack while being glad your state has some wetlands protection in place despite any gutting of the EPA, I fear that what is and will be essential in trying to effectively roll back effects of climate change does not respect state lines or even international boundaries. Earth is an ecosystem as a whole which, while having some natural boundaries (mountains, continents) the oceans and rivers cross even those boundaries freely joining us all regardless of our specific state and federal governments. This is what makes Biden's political and diplomatic efforts so essential to making a difference in our striving toward a more stable world both climatically as well as politically. He has and continues to reach out to engage others as far as he can.
Very true, but as long as the radicals are in charge of the SCOTUS, local action is the only option, as inadequate as that may be. Biden needs to reshape the court, or they will continue to take us backward.
I asked the same thing about the debt ceiling. It seems the government can always come up with money. The debt ceiling seems dumb to me since it's always raised. Why even have it? It seems to exist only for Republicans to complain about spending when they aren't in the majority and can't do whatever they want, or to hold hostage when they aren't in power. Their "cuts" will ADD, not cut, the deficit, while hurting less fortunate Americans, including their own constituents.
Just about every economist will reply that it’s misleading to make an analogy between household and government finances. We often aren’t clear enough about why, perhaps because we don’t say it bluntly enough. So here’s the difference: You are going to get old and eventually die. The government isn’t.
And lenders therefore demand that individual borrowers pay off their debts while they still have the income to do so.
Governments, on the other hand, normally see their revenues rise, generation after generation, as the economies they regulate and tax grow:
In fact, when governments for one reason or another run up large debts, it is, as far as I can tell, unusual to pay those debts off.
The most famous example, albeit one that many people apparently don’t know about, is the debt America incurred to fight World War II. By the war’s end, this debt was around 100 percent of gross domestic product — roughly comparable to the debt level today. So how did we pay off that debt?
We didn’t.
By the end of the Napoleonic Wars, the British government’s debt, according to Bank of England estimates, was 184 percent of G.D.P. — far above America’s debt at the end of World War II.. So how did Britain pay off its Napoleonic debt?
It didn’t.
In much more recent history, when governments were mistakenly pursuing fiscal austerity in the face of high unemployment, I used to accuse deficit scolds of being obsessed with Victorian virtues. I was, I now realize, being unfair to the Victorians.
So for all those whose instinct is to assume that a responsible government would, like a responsible individual, pay off its debts as soon as it can, again:
I know it seems like a really dumb reason, but I think you answered your own question: the debt ceiling exists so that the out-of-power party can complain about the budget and gum up the works. It's intentionally introduced friction, and I'm still mulling over it's usefulness. It falls in the same category as the filibuster -- why have a rule that deliberately makes it more difficult to govern? I'm not sure I'm wise enough to answer.
Actually, they have no other goal than cutting taxes again and again for the wealthy ( some of whom said the didn’t need them) and empowering their “base”. This is not patriotism, this is suicide.
The Radicalized Extreme Court of the United States, “Rec Us” has assumed unlimited control of our laws via their “interpretations” of laws on the books for 50 years. They are literally rewriting the law by surpassing a filibustered Senate that now passes nothing at all. They are the new Super Branch of Government and cannot be voted out
Exactly. The Disgraced Roberts Court is acing as a super legislature without any checks or balances. The laughable fact that Thomas can remain on the court after egregious failures of ethics and violations of Federal law has completely delegitimized it.
SCOTUS is sending a message: the majority is as Radical as the party of the presidents and the majority on the judiciary committees who chose them. They could have been out with flagpoles on January 6th. Sorry to put it in plain English, but to destroy our water and food supply in a time of climate change must have our allies trembling and Putin laughing.
Ted, this right here. I cannot fathom that wetlands, which (at least to my way of thinking) serve as the environment's digestive system in filtering and feeding the area. No, you cannot build on undrained wetlands, but they are there for an environmental reason.
Did you read the case? The posts here are getting stupider by the minute.
The Sackett's sued the EPA over pouring dirt on their land to level it out before they built a house. The land was near a ditch, which was near creek, which was near a lake. Only a moron would think violated the EPA Clean Waters Act, let alone was an environmental hazard.
MY PROOF? The Court voted 9-0.
As a side issue, the court disagreed (5-4) going forward on the whatr constituted wetlands. There were conflicts in the statue that was causing needless litigation. The majority asked Congress to tighten up the language.
Stop being lazy and do your homework. It took me 5 minutes of homework to realize this was all BS.
I'm sorry but this MAY BE the stupidest LAZIEST post of ALL TIME.
Did anyone bother to read the ruling or the merits? Of course not.
Just cut and paste from Media Matters
First it was INCREDIBLY DISHONEST how you characterized the RULING.
The ruling CAME DOWN 9-0 in favor of plaintiffs Michael and Chantell Sackett, two Idaho residents whom the EPA prohibited from building a home near a wetland years ago.
"The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day," Alito's majority opinion stated. "The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as 'waters of the United States' because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not 'waters of the United States.'"
The Sackets had purchased land and were backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare to build.
The lot in question was on a ditch that fed into a a creek, which fed into a lake. Its an incredible stretch to say DIRT used to level out a lot near a ditch, near a creek, near a lake
was a violation of THE CLEAN WATERS ACT.
ONLY A MORON or a CLIMATE ACTIVIST would think so.
BY 9-0 the Court agreed.
As a separate issue the court took up the question of WATERS of the United States
As Ailito wrote "(a) The uncertain meaning of “the waters of the United States” has
been a persistent problem, sparking decades of agency action and litigation. Resolving the CWA’s applicability to wetlands requires a review of the history surrounding the interpretation of that phrase.
However, the court split 5-4 in its analysis of how the federal government should define a water source under the Clean Water Act.
"Understanding the CWA to apply to wetlands that are distinguishable from otherwise covered 'waters of the United States' would substantially broaden [existing statute] to define 'navigable waters' as 'waters of the United States and adjacent wetlands,'" Alito wrote.
“Enact exceedingly clear language” on any rules that affect private property." The majority asked Congress to clarify its language.
THIS IS YET AGAIN A MISTAKE A first year graduate wouldn't make. Your characterization
as gutting the EPA and threatening the climate IS SO DISHONEST I'm at a loss.
Its obvious that all leftist care about is sanctimonious virtue signaling. The truth is NOT a leftwing value.
Next, our national parks and protected lands. The next great sell-off of our national treasures. Soon, sell off all federal buildings and land and rent them back to the Government while that enterprise lasts. Hedge-fund mentality here? You bet. Me thinks a nice new shopping mall for the umber-rich on the site of the Canon Building, which now houses the Congress, would really be nice, he smirks.
The radically aggressive right wing agenda is taking the US back to the Gilded Age. Robber barons have always needed to be held in check, or their sociopathic greed would stomp all over everyone else. No one thinks they are entitled like the rich.
It's as if these idiot justices flunked science class in high school. But we know the real truth, don't we? They have been bought by the Oligarchs who rule this country.
The concept of freedom in this country is being morphed by the Republicans and the right wing SCOTUS majority. Equal treatment under the law and the principle that personal freedoms extend only so far as the point where they impinge on another's freedoms and well-being is being thrown out of the window. It is occurring across a wide front--restrictions on what can be taught, how people can dress, books being banned, regulations to protect health and safety of the population as a whole, restrictions on voting, access to healthcare and bodily autonomy in the case of abortion aaccess and gender affirming care, and even the institution of laws in red states elevating Christianity as a state religion.
Every day there is new evidence of the erosion of freedom in this country. For every win like the Stewart Rhodes conviction and sentencing there are broader counterbalancing losses like the gutting of the ability of the EPA to protect all of us in the name of dismantling hte administrative "deep state."
The concept of freedom is being distorted and perverted as Republicans are pushing the advantage they have crafted over the past 40 years to gerrymander and adjudicate themselves into minority rule and to obliterate the concept of one person, one vote.
The bullies are acting with impunity almost unchecked at this point. And there is no real freedom where bullies rule.
Bullies, and that is exactly what they are, have sociopathically tried to rule the world for eons. Freedom is a product of good faith, solidarity, and keeping them at bay. I think we all harbor Jekyll and Hyde to some degree, so the problem is never defeated for good; but we can battle abuses of power in the short term and cultivate awareness and empathy as a protective strategy into the future. It is clear we have come to a point of crisis. Technology amplifies our our power to do, and can be helpful and healing, or predatory.
I am so grateful for President Joe Biden and the generous attitude he demonstrates even as he is unfairly lied about and condemned. We could not have a better, wise, compassionate and experienced person as our leader.
It has also been great to see seasoned leadership as well as new and upcoming younger leaders, within the Democratic Party, taking more responsibility for governing and building up our nation, with the support and guidance of their seniors.
We must vote, we must serve in anyway we are able, we must kindly and respectfully speak truth to our friends with clarity. These are dangerous days. Our enemy is powerful and "hungry for MORE!" Our enemy is not kind and polite but rather is seeking unbridled control that includes all the riches of this country (including our wetlands) and the souls of its people.
This enemy is literally everywhere. For instance, I was looking for a book for my grandaughter....the books were in the Christian section.....both were compiled/written by young women who were in Trump's administration. I was horrified! ....needless to say I did NOT buy those books.....but sad to say the "wrong"wing of our government has /is brainwashing so many who are not able to think on their own.......the ropes of totalitarianism are tightening.......WE CAN NOT SLEEP!!!!!
Ok. So what do we do? If power begets more power how does it stop before it has total control. Government contracts will be issued only to those that are compliant and complicit with those in power. Voting laws and gerrymandering become instituted to make sure those that win elections are those the extremist want to be elected. The USA will “look” like a Democracy because there is voting but the outcome will be rigged. Laws (some already in place) will require Christian “values” be implemented in every government agency, school, etc you name it. The Christian right wing” SCOTUS judges in the majority has begun to legislate from the bench and will continue to do so. As all these continue to manifest Democracy in the USA will be lost. Illiberal Democracy/ Christian Democracy like that in Hungary will be here. It’s already well on it’s way there here in the USA. So what do we do? Expressing our concerns, venting our frustrations here and other places online is all well and good, we need to have a place to unload the emotional impact of current events, but other than it offering some momentary relief, that’s all it is, momentary relief. It’s good to know we are among other of like mind but where do we go from here. What do we do? It’s looking more and more line the Christian Nationalists are slowly but surely taking over our country. The slow moving coup of the right wing Christian extremists that’s been underway for years is taking over, state governments, state courts, state voting, state laws, state legislative bodies, and the federal government legislative bodies (Congress and the Senate) and federal courts are moving in this direction too, and have been for years. So what do we do? If the system becomes more and more rigged for the right wing extremists/ christian nationalists, what if anything can we do?
Well put. I fret over this daily. Tired of complaining how bad things are. Few seem to care. I've been on the streets protesting. Pitiful turn outs. I've gone to DC to protest. Again, pitiful turnouts. I've gone door to door in voter drives. Ineffectual. I'm discouraged. I know that's what they are counting on. But when you put in all the time and effort -- both physically and emotionally -- and no one pays attention (especially the "media", which is failing us as well) it's disheartening to say the least.
The oligarchs have been very successful in dividing Americans against each other. The only path I see forward is to start talking about the fact that it's not about right versus left, but rather the wealthy and powerful against the rest of us. That is the only message I see a chance of getting through. Maybe even that isn't enough and our American Democracy is doomed. So sad.
And why isn't Biden getting on national telvision and addressing the Nation about the debt ceiling? A bit of leadership would be heartening.
Joe needs to do exactly that. Time for some "fireside chats" with clear, irrefutable facts. Thanks Dan Stipe for your activist protests, and never be frustrated for doing something to create social change. And Voting.
This really resonates with me and I have been thinking along these same line all morning. Perhaps one of the creepiest parts of these right wing is their supposed allegiance to “Christian values.” They make a bullying mockery of Christianity and try to force it down our throats. This will be an ugly battle, but one worth fighting.
When South Carolina passed the 6-week abortion ban, articles declared lawsuits will surely follow. I thought about the religious organizations whose laws protect a women's right to choose. The Episcopal Church is one of them. What if those denominations banded together to bring legal action challenging laws that deny our religious freedoms? Right now we are all forced to comply with Catholic doctrine, superseding many other faiths. Legal actions by organizations powerful enough to stand their ground and win might be worth a try.
So few Americans seem to understand the “faith” of our Founding Fathers. Maybe some would look up “Deists” and “deism” to get some understanding of the “science” that gave US democracy. It was freedom from being ruled as the Radical Republicans of today want to rule. (Of course we had the Puritans too. They seem ascendant today.)
I have loved using SCROTUS. To those who say that my junior high brain is in overdrive, I say that it simply stands for Supreme Court (Reactionary) of the United States.
Keep your cane raised midway.....a whackamole to the masculine midsection! Or in the case of MTG, Kari Lake, etc, the feminine midsection equally targeted. Darn, forgot Boebert
It's hard to grasp how a Supreme Court could systematically dismantle prior court rulings, laws, and regulations that have been in place for a half-century. The overturning of Roe vs. Wade was, of course, the court's signature blow to long-established rights and freedoms. And now a majority of justices are turning the clock back once again, this time gutting a key aspect of environmental regulations protecting waterways.
Having grown up mostly in Florida and basked in its water-everywhere wonders as a child and adult, I have a deep appreciation for wetlands, including how they protect us in many ways. The ruling, typical of this court, is arcane and shows no concern for what's at stake at a time when the planet and its people are under dire threat from climate change.
Clean water is a gift that makes Earth livable for all of its inhabitants. What makes it legal for a private property owner to destroy something so essential to us all? And if this court insists on Congress enacting rules and regulations rather than agencies of the executive branch, we know where we're headed.
Florida fertilizer industry is destroying Florida’s aquifer with toxic waste from massively leaking pools of its toxic waste and with millions of gallons of its hydrofluosilisic acid we add to 70% of the public water in the U.S.
And by extension the sugar cartel, which even today gets protections from Uncle Sam.
I, too, grew up in Florida, back in the good old days, before 6 gillion people moved in, in the name of 'progress', but after the Army Corp of Engineers had redesigned much of South Florida to suit farmers and other business interests. In cutting those canals, they also cut the Everglades ability to regulate itself, but they didn' know or care about that. I suspect that a peat fire that was burning when I left in 1971 is still burning...................
“Roads in Florida could soon include phosphogypsum — a radioactive waste material from the fertilizer industry — under a bill lawmakers have sent to Gov. Ron DeSantis.”
Why would anyone do that? Floridians have been given the gift of beauty and they are destroying it for their own personal amusement. That is sickening.
Not to mention the sugar industry's devastation of the Everglades. Or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers straightening the Kissimmee River, turning it into a canal — a grievous mistake now being corrected. https://www.saj.usace.army.mil/Media/Images/igphoto/2001001716/
That is so beautiful to see. A river enabled to reclaim it's rightful path, with room to adapt as currents change. Soon the riparian zone and flood plain will repair itself, recreating the flood protection and filtering properties of a healthy riverine systems
We visit Florida regularly to visit my wife's family. The canals that at one time teemed with dolphins and manatees are cesspools. The Banana and Indian Rivers are an entirely different color than a few years ago. The stench from fish die outs is overwhelming some years. As I understand it, construction of locks for cruise and container ships prevent the normal ebb and flow of the ocean - which used to flush the system. Now, all that fertilizer runoff just sits and creates algae blooms, removing oxygen from the water as well as poisoning everything.
If the Extreme Court wanted to do something positive for the planet rather than filling the pockets of their puppeteers, they would hear cases suing the corporate monsters who are killing our environment - for profit.
Of course! But Florida is run by developers and large corporations who have had a free reign forever. People want their food cheap and lawns green. Which means they use and produce a lot of fertilizer. Which kills fish and all manner of aquatic life.
Not much newer, but less used up. I am reminded of some of the emails that came to light in the Subprime Crash, that some in ill-fated banks knew that the ice was getting thin, but could not bear to mess with such a profitable con game.
It's called the Dark Ages because the light of Rome went out, and there's very little written record from the period. But I guarantee they were far more enlightened than the GOP.
This is true, Holly. The renaissance grew out of the freedom of the so-called "Dark Ages", which gave people the flexibility to experiment, recreate, and begin other ways of existing. I'm not an expert on that era, but one of my daughters is, and she says that ordinary people had more freedom and were more creative then than the times before or after. Our histories tend to focus on written records and on the lives of prominant people, but as we all know, the real progress grows out of regular folks.
You are so right, the right wing justices are appointing themselves and what they represent into an ideological reversal of what has been established law for over two generations. The political alignment is patently obvious. This is open warfare, without a doubt.
Arcane is just the word I have been searching for all morning. There is something seriously wrong with these people. I am an artist, a gardener, a hiker, a teacher, a mother and now a grandmother. I can’t imagine having so little concern for people, the , environment, and the amazing plants and creatures we share our planet with. These people have no sense of awe , wonder,or humility. This is as dangerous as it is ugly.
It's remarkable and tragic how much damage Trump and McConnell have wrought by packing the Supreme Court. At least two of the appointments shouldn't have been theirs to make,
Rhodes is going away for 18+ years and I couldn’t be happier except, it should’ve been longer. This horrible specimen of a man is getting what is coming to him. In fact, he might need another patch for his other eye. The horrors his ex-wife and children lived through are enough to make you regurgitate. His cohorts will be sentenced also. I cry no tears for them but will dance upon their graves whenever that time comes, no matter how old I am. The same goes for Trump and Company. May they all reap the benefits that Tarrio and Rhodes just received.
No negotiations on debt ceiling. Certainly, one can not reason with irrational people such as the Freedom Caucus. DeSantis is a joke, a dunce. He will pardon people “aggressively”? There should not be any chances that lil’ Hitler will win a nomination. Nor should Trump. He belongs behind many bars.
They are courting the evil, and will do anything to win. They will pardon all who should be jailed, and jail all their enemies. I’m sure a list has already been made.
Marlene I think what Elmer needs is treatment more than damnation. His family had to live with the paranoia inherent in someone with manic fantasies of power and being a "savior." He needed to control everyone he could to prop up a worldview wrapped around his perceived role which would allow him to fend off the possibility that he may actually have had an episodic mental illness. Those with bipolar disorder frequently if not characteristically reject any notion that their feelings are the result of illness and regularly resist treatment or discontinue treatment once begun. It will be interesting to see if some treatment can materialize within the confines of incarceration. It is not for nothing that his son Dakota used the words "manic activity" throughout his descriptions of home life with Elmer. (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63709446)
Well, Elmer may have lost his mind and his family, but at least he could still buy weapons. But oh no, he's a felon now! The poor man has lost his 2nd Amendment rights, too, the very definition of a powerless white American male. So sad, now he'll just have to serve as an inspiration for the next generation of "freedom fighters" while his bipolar ass rots in prison. (Sorry, but I had to relieve an excess of snark, my supply was getting too high.)
There certainly are times that the pressure valve of snark needs to be relieved. Always good to note when you're doing that. My lapses into "inappropriate language/comparisons are usually blamed on my junior high brain. I have learned to acknowledge that so that my sarcasm does not create a sarchasm into which people fall.
That’s quite an article. I hope we outlive the fear, paranoia, and violence of the right wing. Somehow we must. What a journe the Rhodes family has been on. DT has brought out the very worst in everyone.
0 to 5 is a critical period for full adult development. Interesting that Clarence Thomas suffered similar abandonment olb y his father at a very young age. I wonder what other aspects of childhood trauma they share?
Week after week the “Supremes” roll back one or more legislative improvement that enabled our Government to improve the quality of American life! Our only potential remedy is to add 4 more fair-minded justices. We have to work hard-- each of us who are reading Dr. Heather-- to persuade all eligible 18s to 25s and all eligible women 25 to 44 to register and to turn out in 2024! Please go to www.turnup.us/ and contribute: please....
Ira, While I engage regularly with Gen-Zs and Millennials, I would note, relative to the Presidential election, that the Republican nominee currently need only block Biden from receiving 270 electoral votes to become president. As I expect we all know, if no one reaches 270, the decision moves to the House, wherein Republicans presently control more state delegations than Democrats, each of which would get one vote. Accordingly, because the next Congress would decide the election, we must start identifying delegations that are flippable, particularly seeing that the “No Label” purported bipartisan third party is receiving enormous amounts of dark money from Republican PACs. I mention this, because, aside from galvanizing the youth vote, we need to be excessively strategic at the federal, state, and local levels if we’re to out-organize Republicans, whose tactics for securing minority rule over the will of the majority have been discerningly effective.
Imagine our frustration here in Wisconsin, where we have been living in a severely gerrymandered regime. The balance of power on the Wisconsin Supreme Court recently shifted to a "liberal" majority, so we have at least a glimmer of hope that election fairness can be restored soon. Most of our Republicans don't have anything interesting to say, but they are adept at trickery and deceit. They are very proud of themselves for being able to thwart the will of the majority of voters at the district level -- they dominate both chambers of the legislature, despite getting fewer popular votes in statewide races. We keep hoping the Democrats will figure out ways to persuade rural and small-town voters to stop voting for the Republicans.
David, I can imagine your frustration, and, while I’m probably stating the obvious, I would press Democrats to invest more in rural and small-town communities, to the point people really sense they are being listened to and, hence, come to trust that Democrats, contrary to their counterparts, also will fight hard to remedy legitimate grievances felt by those who too often are the victims of our system’s unevenly distributed resources.
Barbara. wish I could shout your comment from the rooftops. But in lieu of that, I encourage all those reading to watch this clip from Beau of the Fifth Column. This is exactly what you are talking about! He's had several clips lately about Democrats messaging!
I’m sure that this tactic is the republican “go to.” Chump, etc never let a good way to screw our democracy go to waste. This is as important a comment as I have seen anywhere…
At the end of the day, Barbara, nothing really matters except what you and Ira have just said. Our hope lies in actual strategy. While this forum is full of legitimate complaints (my whining included), the only thing that matters is outvoting the fascist madness.
Barbara I feel what you have laid out is the absolute gameplan for the upcoming election. It's achievable through their setup gerrymandering and voter suppression tactics that they have already implemented.
Barbara: I agree entirely with respect to careful selection of flippable House seats. I’ve analyzed every CD and it comes down to approximately 20 seats dominated by 5 in NY and 4-6 in CA and the rest here and there. Success, as usual, will be determined first by the charisma of the candidates and the relative effectiveness of each candidate’s campaign, but I would argue that 24 fundamentally will be decided by prime issues of abortion rights, gun safety, health care, and the Presidential campaign with women and youth registration/turnout playing critically important roles. If it is Trump vs Joe, I can’t see any significant role for No Labels, do you? If it is neither Trump nor Joe, all bets are off! But I guarantee that the prohibition of abortion and gun massacres will get much worse in battleground states such as FL, NC, GA, TX, TN (yes TN?), and the significance of these issues as national battles for the soul of America will be primary in CA, NY, PA, and in selective CDs in many other states. Democracy itself will be on the line for the future! Democracy vs. authoritarianism! And you and I and everyone else on these marvelous chat threads will have to play key roles in smart and selective donations as well as door to door turnout movements in those battlegrounds. Don’t waste our money and time on candidates who are sure to lose or sure to win! Focus on winning truly marginal races. We can get it done, win back the House, strengthen the Senate majority and save our Democracy!
"Week after week the “Supremes” roll back one or more legislative improvement that enabled our Government to improve the quality of American life!"
Many decades of hard work and collaboration. Like a malicious computer virus coder, Republicans have combed our governmental infrastructure for exploitable weaknesses and have weaponized them to sabotage democracy and the common weal to serve a radically plutocratic agenda.
Ira What a difference two generations make. The Supremes in the 60s was a marvelous Motown group with all members, including Diana Ross, from the Detroit projects.
The current ‘Subpremes’ are white guys in black robes, which may be the new white supremacist garb for the KKK.
Many thanks Susan of Troy; these Harvard students are fantastic and very effective as they use paid SnapChat, Instagram and Tic Toc to reach specific ages nonpartisan within specific Selected and only competitive CDs in only competitive states on abortion right and guns or climate change; in other words no waste of $$ on any CDs or States except in nonpartisan competitive areas!! Reach and register literally hundreds of thousands of potential voters in a matter of hours to enable them to register to vote ONLINE in a matter of less than 5 minutes: very successful!! Please contribute folks and it is totally tax deductible!!
Hope you recover quickly from the hip surgery, Susan!
Unfortunately, no postcards for me this year. My hands gave out last year after less than a hundred. I have mild Dupuytren's disease and had a flare. Now my fingers are stiff and clumsy. I can hardly write my own signature and that's only with a fountain pen (no pressure needed, unlike ball-points). So looking for other ways to do this. Thinking I'll get my fam together for a few postcard days when the time comes. On good days I should be able to still write out a few. I'd use my printer, but geez, so tacky- and I think not nearly as effective.
Is the Supreme Court untouchable? They don't have wings, harps and halos, and a couple of them are very questionable. We know who got them in there - is it a one-way door? Oh, RBG, RBG...
It has become apparent that the Roberts Court majority decides how they are going to rule, and then they go looking for supporting arguments, ignoring relevant cases etc that would compel them to move in a different direction.
If it's going to be blatantly political, then why not just bring it out into the open? Increase the court by adding many Justices, to become a deliberative body, like the Senate was in days of old. Imagine the House of Representatives and Senate consisting of only nine Members! That's nowhere near enough minds to work out the best course going forward into a better future.
The Congress constitutes a tiny minority of the American People, which is bad enough in an alleged "demockeracy". But now we have an overtly political high court, so why not turn it into a large deliberative body, with perhaps fifty members, maybe one from every state?
With a larger body to pretend to dispassionately contemplate law and precedent, perhaps some among them would offer cogent arguments, thereby shaming the pretenders into doing the right thing.
Five people are establishing legal reality for 330 million Americans for years into the future.
I wish we could have a "Shadow Court", comprised of leading legal scholars, who would hear what the official Supreme Court hears, and then do their own research so that the rest of us could compare what our Shadow Court says with what our Supreme Court says. In the past this might have undermined public faith and confidence in the high court. But since that faith and confidence has become damaged by the Roberts Court, a Shadow Court might help steer the official court to be more diligent and scrupulous.
They already have a shadow docket, another way to screw us all. Me thinks it’s too late for something to make the current crop more “diligent and scrupulous.” That ship has sailed…
My view is that we accorded great respect to Supreme Court decisions, regardless of whether or not we agree, in order to protect what I want to refer to as the "sanctity" of the SCOTUS. It's much like protecting the "full faith and credit of the United States" for the sake of our monetary system. But if, as you say, that ship has sailed, then it feels like asking our local pharmacist to perform delicate surgery on our innards. If we lose our faith in our long-established institutions, what will become of us? Will we survive long enough to repair the damage? The 45th president* took a wrecking ball to our system, and apparently that process is on-going. So we are watching as our cancer metastasizes, while we are seemingly powerless to cure our malady. It's becoming increasingly difficult to find humor.
I may be a bit off kilter, as the 25th of May was the day in 1971 when I was discharged from active duty in the Army, as a conscientious objector, after having served three years, four months, and seventeen days, including a tour in the war. To watch these people deliberately wrecking our nation -- I have no words for it. But I intend to keep on keepin' on.
I’m against allowing each state to choose a Justice. That’s how the Repugnants win the White House despite losing the popular vote. Too many small red states.
I was really only indulging in a flight of whimsy. In Wisconsin we elect Supreme Court Justices by state-wide popular vote. Although we may have the worst gerrymander in the nation, it doesn't matter for state-wide elections. In our recent election in April for Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court we managed to elect an openly "liberal" judge from Milwaukee, which shifts the balance from conservative majority to liberal majority. We hope that our rotten gerrymander case will be heard by our new Supreme Court.
I think I would prefer a system of choosing Justices of the Supreme Court by a bi-partisan, or omni-partisan, panel of legal scholars. We should try to foster and maintain the appearance of impartiality among members of the high court. It must surely be exceedingly difficult for someone like Justice Barrett to separate, in her mind, the difference between her fervently-held religious beliefs and a fair reading of law and precedent. But we must try to remain impartial.
RBG was a great SCJ BUT she was ill and going on in age where heath deteriorates quickly. She should have stepped down under a Democratic President. We carry this burden partly because of her.
What we are headed for is, a fascist, authoritarian un-united states. Like i have said before, i am NOT staying here if that happens. If i stay, the fascists will eventually come for me and do away with me because i am not going along with their fascist, Christian BS. I have never seen such deliberate, insane, irresponsible behavior from human beings as the ones with an ''R'' by their name in our government. Looney tunes to the maximum extreme..
Anyone laboring under the myth that our democracy was/is safe because the Dems are in the White House and very marginally control the Senate should thoroughly digest Heather’s column today AND ponder Biden’s poll numbers….and the SCOTUS ruling on clean water….we are on the edge of anarchy and inching closer, daily. Democracy is very close to being held ‘hostage’….
I am beginning to think as long as (a lot? many? most?) have a smartphone in their hand and scan scroll all day long looking at the (f'ing) Kardashians or whatever junk is trending on Twitter, they won't give a damn.
Religion used to be the opiate of the people. Now it is social media.
So true! And then will blame Biden for everything and either won’t vote or will vote against him, because they are clueless, refusing to look past their nose.
Frankly, I'm glad most people are devoted to doing their jobs, taking care of their families, enjoying their friends, and "waltzing through their lives." They keep the food on the shelves, power in the light sockets, and water running from the tap. But when we have to stop "waltzing" and start scrutinizing the people we hired to run the government, everything slows to a stop. No dances, no tending to our lives, just fuming about the a-holes who don't seem to be doing the job we hired them for.
It’s the people who were appointed who are F-ing up the government. And if the GOP takes over, they will make it easier to fire dedicated federal employees and appoint more extremists. They have long been willing to starve government departments so that they are unable to regulate, and once staffing has been decimated, they argue that the government departments are incompetent and thus should be abolished.
Just discovered your substack and appreciate the directness and clarity of your reporting.
The illegitimate "conservative" majority on SCOTUS contrived by the fascist goons at the Federalist Society have decided that they are the arbiters of science, rather than the actual experts employed by the Administration, when it comes to "interpreting the will of Congress". The simple truth is that nobody in the Judiciary at any level is academically or intellectually qualified to dictate what constitutes a "wetland" and thus WOTUS. Their arrogant presumption is what makes this erroneous ruling such a dangerous precedent - the false pretense that science can be determined in any court of law will inevitably lead us to the abomination that was Lysenkoism.
They are not interpreting science, they are using selective challenges to laws as their way of writing new legislation--legislation that benefits their financial friends.
Point taken, though I would say they are not interpreting science but rather supplanting science with their partisan imaginings.
And yes - lately the Federalist Society has been succeeding at their long game of engineering the Judiciary to "legislate" where conservative minorities in elected legislative roles fail to pass laws favorable to their twisted agenda
Yeah I'll never skip an opportunity to tie the current Republican leadership to the utter failures of the Soviet Union and Russia that their MAGA base so admires
But certainly everybody knows those Founder Boys who ordained and established our Constitution - upon which those originalist SCOTUS Boys rely - had the environment upper most in their minds to ensure the people had an enduring living planet for themselves and their posterity...right?
I remember when W was “president,” and many of the scientific pApers related to the environment were redacted, giving no hint to their true conclusions. And I thought W was as low as they could go…
Yet I note that Lysenkoism is in many ways a forerunner for the entire field of epigenetics, one of the most robust discoveries of the late 20th Century. (I'm sure that was completely off topic, but it's fun when what was wrong in science is revealed to be right, but incomplete. Wouldn't it be wonderful if everything were actually true? And everything we thought were lies are actually misinterpretations of the same phenomena?
No, he was not in any way the forerunner of epigenetics - Lysenko was simply wrong when he claimed that all inheritance was essentially Lamarckian.
The original sin of Lysenkoism can't be so glibly sanitized by claims he presaged the modern understanding of epigenetics, which is firmly rooted on the existence of genes.
I can see why you're a bit exercised over Lysenko, although I think you're conflating the flaws in his research with the deadly force of the Soviet political machine behind him. I don't know what other ideas Lysenco had, but I understnd the basic one is that acquired traits are inheritable, which is why the planaria experiments were so provocative.
That's also the basic understanding of epigenetics, that environmental conditions can trigger genetic changes that persist over generations. If Lysenko had worked for a sane, rational, evidence-based government, the Russians would probably be on the forefront of genetic research, not everybody else.
So, Mr. Kelly, t'was not snark. I was merely limiting my examination to the secientific ideas that were being promoted.
Nevertheless, thank you for finding that Atlantic article, it's an excellent read. I've always known that the adoption of Lysenkoism put Soviet biological research a generation behind -- I never knew the details of the human toll exacted by trying to prove his half-baked scientific theories by brute political force. But to reference a long-ago bill once introduced in the 1897 Indiana legilature, no amount of political will can make pi equal to three.
No, I'm using Lysenko as an example of how ideology is no substitute for actual science. Lysenko rejected the existence of genes as a bourgeois Western concept. He never conducted a single bit of legitimate research. He believed, a priori, that plants conformed to Communist ideology - that by changing their environment one could change their very nature, permanently. He falsified results of his "experiments" to support this narrative.
Stalin loved that this uneducated peasant, so committed to the principles of the Communist state, was going to elevate their ideology by transforming agriculture. Lysenko's ideological fervor, willingly implemented by Communist dictators, caused ten million Soviets and likely 30 million Chinese to die of starvation.
Our modern understanding of epigenetics rests squarely on the now well-established existence of genes. We (and by "we" I mean people like myself in academia and biotech) don't fully understand the mechanisms of epigenetic persistence yet. But what we do understand so far is that it's the result of changes to the expression of genes rather than changes to the genes themselves, and that it's temporary. We haven't observed permanent changes to the genes that control the expression of other genes. If we ever do, such a result would be an observation of just genetics, not epigenetics.
Wow, great response! All I really knew about Lysenko's methods is the middle school blurb about some planaria experiments in Russia and the idea that learned behaviors can be inherited, a notion cherished by Soviet leaders. Your more detailed treatment puts him more in the category of Andrew Wakefield, but with a ruthless totalitarian regime behind him. And come to think of it, I think Wakefield will probably enjoy a similar relationship wtih the next Republican administration..
But as for environmentally-induced changes to gene expression, didn't the cardioprotective benefits of famine survival in Sweden historical studies persist over several generations? Is that what you mean by temporary? (And btw, what do you do for academia and biotech? I'm just a perpetual student down at the University, admiring the pretty baubles on the lab tables!)
Sooooo. When the next hurricane hits these red states where wet land destruction will accelerate thanks to the SCROTUS, do the rest of us have to pitch in (again) so they can rebuild? Asking for a friend.
HOW the heck do these "people" like McCarthy have any self-respect in making these kinds of statements, and supporting TFG!!!????? They are no better than as stated by Judge Mehta, “You, sir, present an ongoing threat and a peril to this country and to the republic and to the very fabric of this democracy.”
And then there's SCOTUS, gutting our environmental protections. SMH.
Dr. Heather, you sure know how to swing a quote like a mallet and close your LFAAs with impact.
"Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung said in a statement: “This is nothing more than a targeted, politically motivated witch hunt against President Trump that is concocted to meddle in an election and prevent the American people from returning him to the White House.”"
We The People are definitely going to prevent dump from getting anywhere NEAR the White House again. Thank you, Heather. I was thrilled that Rocky Rhodes is going to do very long hard time and then have three more years of being kept under surveillance. This is good news for us. It gives me hope TFG will also be doing time. Maybe they can be cell mates.
The undoing of EPA water protections sent my mood right back down to miserable. I just don’t know what these IDIOTS are thinking, oh, right they DON’T THINK about anything. OMG.
McCarthy is only slightly smarter than Louie Gohmert, and has frequently made statements that show that he can be even dumber than the Dumbest Member Of Congress. Trying to point to Biden as responsible for EPA wetland regulations 50 years in the making is an example of this. McCarthy is feckless, and I'm embarrassed that the idiots in Bakersfield that keep sending him back to the House call themselves "Californians".
I have no love for Oklahoma, but I'll give them this - their farmers are mostly smart enough to realize that it's dumb AF to try to farm cotton in a desert - something the Bakersfieldians are too dumb to figure out. McCarthy was born and raised there - better EPA regs might have prevented the brain damage he's clearly suffered.
To be clear, my point wasn't that Oklahomans are dumb, and certainly farmers aren't! But the regressive conservatism is NOT California today. Bakersfield never progressed like most of the rest of the state - it's firmly mired in the unenlightened past.
Not just blaming Biden for EPA regulations, but for this case, which was set in motion under W's EPA. I long for the days when people were ashamed to blatantly lie. I also long for the days when people were ashamed to be blatantly racist, homophobic and misogynistic.
When in hell was that, Jeanne? I knew people like that, but there have always been people who openly lied, people who were openly racist, homophobic and misogynistic, and got away with it because nobody called them out. At least now we are calling them out. And I still think we're going to win, because if they weren't worried about it, they wouldn't be putting so much effort into pretending they aren't doing what they are doing. Plus, the unrepentant ones are looking like what they are: unrepentant fools.
Admittedly I was thinking of a single situation, back in 2012 when Missouri Rep Todd Akin was running for Senate and made the stupid comment about "legitimate" rape victims, the Republican party, the ticket led by Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, abandoned him. Maybe it was an isolated incident but it struck me that there was a time the Republican Party held despicable people accountable....
I remember that incident: Akin's comment floored me. You are right about the Republican Party turning their back on him. But they never turned their back on Newt Gingrich after it came out that he had been having a full-blown long-time affair at the same time he was digging at Bill Clinton. They were right there behind him. That period was when I knew the Republican party was lost. They only turned their backs on disposable people. At the same time, I still knew decent conservative Republicans, and respected them. They were the ballast. I know many who struggle with their identity as Republicans, and are as disgusted as we are.
Please, NO! Jimmy had charm and a good heart, even though he misbehaved. McCarthy has NO good qualities: he's just a corrupt, hungry-for-power, narcissist! He'd do anything to get what he wants, the country be damned!
"HOW the heck do these "people" like McCarthy have any self-respect in making these kinds of statements, and supporting TFG!!!?????"
Not a trace.
"as stated by Judge Mehta, 'You, sir, present an ongoing threat and a peril to this country and to the republic and to the very fabric of this democracy' .”
SCOTUS is stupid, uninformed, arrogant and dangerous. The EPA of Nixon regulatory approach to wetlands makes perfect sense to this farmer, and www.lewisfamilyfarm.com has protected wetlands where possible. We also created a huge pond to offer water birds a home and fish, turtles, muskrat and others habitat. We have protected the smallest living organisms, thus protecting the base of life itself and food for wildlife. Wetlands host the smallest living creatures, many invisible. Birds need mosquitoes. SC0TUS is all wet on this one.
Evidently the right-wing SCOTUS justices and their donor/backers have their own sources of clean water and don't have to drink the same water the rest of us do. It is jaw-dropping to watch the justices dismantle our country, law by law. What will they go after next?
They don’t have to drink the same water, but a few generations in the future, their great grandchildren, will have to find a new planet, uninhabited and unpolluted by repubs.
I write tonight in an attempt to provide what I hope is a slightly deeper perspective on the Sackett decision by the Supremes today.
While I wholeheartedly join in the overall tenor of dismay and umbrage at the fact that this Court has now taken a second significant step to disembowel the letter and spirit of the major pieces of legislation that created and empowered the EPA within less than a year's time, I also feel that there is a development within the Sackett opinion that is worth noting.
Please know that every Supreme Court decision has both a holding or judgment, and a decision or opinion. The former is basically who won and who lost, or some combination of same, and the latter is the why and wherefore. The "why and wherefore" of course, contains the final legal interpretation of the particular law/statute in question and the factual pattern presented therewith.
I have not read the entirety of the Sackett decision, so my thoughts here are certainly incomplete. From my cursory glance however, I see that it is yet another terrible decision emasculating the powers of the EPA in a manner aligned at least somewhat with the long running extreme conservative anti-regulatory, defang the "administrative state" school of thought. Yet, that same glance tells me it isn't quite as bad as the earlier EPA v. West Virginia decision.
In the latter decision, delivered as part of the terrible trio of decisions in the final week of the Court's term last year (Dobbs and Bruen being the others), Chief Justice Roberts dove deeply into sophistry, as he parsed the congressionally delegated EPA authority (Heather's exposition of this in tonight's letter is spot on) so finely as to render it meaningless as an executive department.
In contrast, the Sackett decision was not written by the Chief Justice but by one of the two cranky radical revanchists on the Court, Sullen Sam Alito. (No Clearance Clarence/Corrupt Crony of Crow Clarence, being the other)
More importantly, none other than Squee's pal, Justice Brett Kavanaugh concurred in the judgment but not in Justice Alito's lead opinion. This is important considering that this was a 5-4 decision.
In fact, ALL NINE JUSTICES agreed that the Sacketts were wronged by the EPA's interpretation of the Clean Water Act to their attempt to build their home. In other words, there was no disagreement among the nine Justices that the EPA overreached when attempting to stop this particular couple from building this particular house, on this particular parcel of land in Idaho.
Justice Kavanaugh seems to have articulated a kinder, gentler version of Justice Kagan's angry dissent respecting the Court's brazen tossing over of the clear language in the Clean Water Act empowering the EPA to regulate wetlands "adjacent" to waters covered by the Act. Alito's opinion injected a hitherto unknown "continuing surface connection" test to limit the long understood definition of wetlands covered by the Act. Kavanaugh took exception to that and said so. Basically, he said that the term "adjacent" within the Act has never been interpreted to mean "adjoining", because those two terms have wholly different meanings. He is correct.
I find some small comfort in this, because it appears that Justice "I like beer, how about you, Senator?!", has thrown down the gauntlet before his fellow Trumpian appointees, calling them out on their absurdity uber analysis here. Further, as there will certainly be significant litigation stemming from this opinion, Justice Kavanaugh may stand as a surprising bulwark to maintain at least a bit of sanity in environmental jurisprudence and resulting policy.
Still, we're all down stream, aren't we? Frat-boy Justice sans pretzel-analysis aside, this decision will make it MUCH easier and faster for us to shit in our own drinking water.
I hope you are right, that the Court is still a deliberative body that is actually aware of the effect of their rulings. Sometime is seems like they are willing to live in the world of their abslutist fantasies until the flood waters actually reach their own personal doorsteps. Sort of like Thomas decrying same-sex marriage while ignoring the fact that his interracial marriage is allowed under the very same legal reasoning.
If you want to see just how far out of touch Alito's opinion in Sackett is, read "Wetlands: Characteristics and Boundaries" published by the National Academy of Sciences in 1995. NAS commissioned a task force in 1993 to bring together scientific consensus for policymakers to use to define jurisdictional wetlands. They also review the history of legislation leading to the Clean Water Act and jurisprudence relating to wetland regulation following its passage. The book is available for free download here: https://nap.nationalacademies.org/download/4766
Notably there's zero mention of this seminal work in the Sackett decision, even in passing. Today's Republicans ignore any science that doesn't comport with their ideology. SCOTUS did the same thing in Dobbs and in EPA v. WVa
Wow! Thanks for that, John. I'll check out the NAS book. This is outrageous, yet given the recent history of this Court, not surprising. Needless to say, it didn't use to be this way. If I remember correctly, Justice Stevens' opinion in Rapanos reflected some serious research, as is expected for this area of jurisprudence
As has been pointed out by numerous observers today, Traitor Trump is now no longer just on the hook for obstruction of justice by keeping the documents, but is now liable for prosecution under the Espionage Act for hiding the documents, and for "dissemination" for letting anyone not authorized to see them.
The Orcs masquerading as human beings in the House Republicans need to be seen as the traitors they are ("declaring war on the United States") and dealt with as such.
A good day, these days, when a key insurrectionist/traitor gets a well-deserved sentence and #DeSaster is trending on Twitter. It couldn't be more perfect and hopefully will hasten that fascist's political demise.
The wetlands rulings though - it makes me weep. And rage. An illegitimate court, with two credibly accused predators and a majority of zealots, is actively destroying the country.
The wetlands ruling really bothers me. As if you cannot see the damage that has been done by allowing unfettered building/development/pollution of our wetlands. Another commenter noted the decay of the Everglades from the demand for green lawns and cruise ship access.
My little corner of the world (the southwest side of Eugene in the Willamette Valley) has a very intricate and (now) protected area of wetlands within the Willamette River system (the wetlands west of my house feed into Amazon slough which feeds into the Long Tom River which joins the Willamette just north of Eugene.
Sorry, Ms. Gilbert, but you sent a chill down my spine when you refered to "authentic" Democrats, because I am very confident that while our opinions differ on a great many topics, we are both still Democrats, and I will never accuse you of being a "DINO" or some other derogatory name just because we disagree. Those are Republican tactics that have led them into the right-wing cesspit they are now floundering in. We work together, differences and all.
Too true -- didn't the defection of a N. Carolina Democrat help the Repubs override a Governor's veto of an abortion ban? And Sen. Sinema deserves her own comment thread. Nevertheless, we must not let the actions of individuals turn our "fringe" against our "middle."
With the G.O.P. narrowing their belief system down to "Whatever Trump Says!, the Democratic Party is having to cover a huge amount of ideological territory in order to maintain a two-party system. At what other time in our history would Bernie Frank, A.O.C, , Joe Biden, and Joe Manchin ever be on the same political side? In its own way, it's as absurd as the Koch Brothers climbing into bed with the Q-Anon nuts and the dirt-scratcher Evangelicals. But somehow, the current power dynamic requires it.
Heather, thank you for enumerating the amount of potential wetlands loss caused by the SCOTUS’ ruling. When the paved wetlands allow even more destruction by hurricanes, just watch the Supremes that allowed it disavow having any inkling that their ruling could cause the catastrophe.
Something not getting nearly enough attention is Ron Desantis considering pardoning TFG if he’s elected. This could leave supporters of TFG with a dilemma: vote for a president that might be serving from jail or vote for a TFG-lite who might pardon TFG.
Mary! As to your first paragraph, I of course thought of Joni Mitchell: "I wrote 'Big Yellow Taxi' on my first trip to Hawaii. I took a taxi to the hotel and when I woke up the next morning, I threw back the curtains and saw these beautiful green mountains in the distance. Then, I looked down and there was a parking lot as far as the eye could see, and it broke my heart […] this blight on paradise. That's when I sat down and wrote the song." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2595abcvh2M
As to your second paragraph, Yikes! But maybe Dems should make this a campaign slogan: "A vote for DeSantis is a vote to pardon Trump!"
If our wetlands can not be protected, no one’s water is safe.
Agree, 100%. And if our wetlands disappear, what happens to the wildlife that lives there? This, coupled with climate change, is incredibly frightening to me.
I saw that 900 different species live in wetlands all over the country. While we might want to propose that states take over regulating our wetlands, it turns out that about half of the stats have laws on the books stating that they cannot impose stricter regulations than the EPA, so when the Court destroys the federal government's regulations, they are also effective preventing the states from taking over. I keep wondering if any of the Justices have children or grandchildren and why they're not concerned about the planet subsequent generations will be inheriting.
It is beyond tragic that the party of extreme greed is actually willing to destroy the EPA.
They're willing to destroy the world we all live in/on. The delusion is that their money can buy them exemption from reality. Good luck with that.
I heard this reported on NPR yesterday, while driving. My first thought wasn't Houston, but Southern Louisiana and Katrina. People are having to be relocated because the very land they've lived on for generations is being inudated. But then, they're poor people, mostly, so who cares, right, Alito?
The destruction of the planet is also connected to a specific Evangelical/ Dominionist ideology. They believe that only once the planet is in ruins, Jesus can return. Thousands of Christian officials in all levels of government believe this. This brand of policymaking has been going on at least since Caspar Weinberger, who believed protecting the environment didn't matter, because the rapture was upon us. It's complete mental illness. If there was one test for office, it should be that Armageddonists cannot hold office.
It’s not mental illness, it’s weaponized imbecility.
I think you are right, Holly. I wish I could wave a wand to remove the delusion of supremacy from human beings. Until we recognize that we are simply a part of nature and respect it, we are doomed.
I once asked one of these "Armageddonists" how they would know the real Jesus when He comes to Earth again. "Well," he said, "I'll know it's the real Jesus when he confirms His Message in the Bible." "What if He wants to give you a new Message? What if He says something like, 'Now for Chapter 2 of the New Testament!'?" "Then I'll know it's a false Christ and we'll have to kill him" (The fact that we were conversing in the pitch darkness of a Cub Scout cavern campout trip late at night in NW Georgia made it even creepier.)
It's sad -- even Jesus Himself can't tell them anything new.
I have often wished the rapture would occur and carry off these wing nuts. They had signs on their cars that said they would disappear.
The great Sigourney Weaver has a question for the room.
https://youtu.be/Ay80wwQ_e2k
My religion is Voodoo. It is no less valid than any other religion (islam, christianity, etc). We do not have this 'rapture' problem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Voodoo
What? Seriously, I knew they were nuts (I have 2 of them in my immediate family) but this is really really out there.
It's a cult, just slower to act than Jim Jones.
Wasn't Weinberger Jewish? If so, he couldn't believe in Rapture. Or was he such a self-hating Jew that Rapture theology was in his wheelhouse?
Wow. This about Christian officials is new to me. It does make sense that something had to be behind it besides just ... what? Religious fervor, in my opinion, is emotionally damaged people looking for black-and-white answers, and it puts too many of them in the position of continually being manipulated.
Destruction of the planet?
Pouring dirt on your lot to level it out before you build is destroying the planet? There lot was near ditch, that was near creek, which was near a lake.
The sanctimonious lecturing is unbelievable.
BTW the court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacketts. I'll bet you didn't know that before you virtued signaled about the planet.
By 5-4 the Majority asked Congress to tighten their language on the term wet lands to lessen litigation.
Let's stop lying about the POST
DID YOU READ THE RULING? Of course not.
It was a 9-0 ruling on the merits.
The case was about an Idaho couple s Michael and Chantell Sackett who purchased property near
Priest Lake, Idaho, and began backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare
for building a home. The Environmental Protection Agency informed
the Sacketts that their property contained wetlands and that their
backfilling violated the Clean Water Act, which prohibits discharging
pollutants into “the waters of the United States.” 33 U. S. C. §1362(7).
The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day. The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as “waters of the United States” because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not “waters of the United States.”
AGAIN the Sackets poured DIRT near a ditch, which was near a creek, which was near lake.
ONLY A MORON or Climate activist would would believe this is damaging the enviroment or that it violated the CLEAN WATERS ACT.
The Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacket's
As a separate question the Court disagreed over the language of what constitutes wetlands. By a 5-4 margin the Majority argued the definition language was causing litigation and that Congress needed to tighten up the language.
IT IS A DISGRACFUL that the Supreme Court is accused gutting the EPA, or harming the environment.
It took me 5 minutes of research to see this who post was a LIE. It speaks to the LAZINESS and DISHONESTY of Heather and her acolytes that they did no homework.
Katrina was bad and really hard on lower income folks. I was part of a church group that made three 1 week repair efforts. Because I was qualified I did mostly rewiring of homes. In many cases the original wiring was terrible but we could fix that what was harder was helping the people deal with the hell they had gone through. About half of our group just spent time with folks listening to what they had been through.
Having spent more that 30 years working in heavy industry dealing with the EPA and OHSA wasn't always easy but both are critical to our personal and collective future.
The Supreme Court must be fixed. Not easy but we the people have to get this done starting now for the 2024 election.
Hopefully, fixing the Supreme Court is next on the Biden agenda. Soon as we get past this debt ceiling debacle. I think Joe Biden will be remembered as the best US President in American history!
That was my first thought too along with the destruction of mangrove swamps in other places. Poor people, why should the wealthy and their minions in government even give them a thought.
Let's stop lying about the POST
DID YOU READ THE RULING? Of course not.
It was a 9-0 ruling on the merits.
The case was about an Idaho couple s Michael and Chantell Sackett who purchased property near
Priest Lake, Idaho, and began backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare
for building a home. The Environmental Protection Agency informed
the Sacketts that their property contained wetlands and that their
backfilling violated the Clean Water Act, which prohibits discharging
pollutants into “the waters of the United States.” 33 U. S. C. §1362(7).
The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day. The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as “waters of the United States” because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not “waters of the United States.”
AGAIN the Sackets poured DIRT near a ditch, which was near a creek, which was near lake.
ONLY A MORON or Climate activist would would believe this is damaging the enviroment or that it violated the CLEAN WATERS ACT.
The Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacket's
As a separate question the Court disagreed over the language of what constitutes wetlands. By a 5-4 margin the Majority argued the definition language was causing litigation and that Congress needed to tighten up the language.
IT IS A DISGRACFUL that the Supreme Court is accused of gutting the EPA, or harming the environment.
It took me 5 minutes of research to see this who post was a LIE. It speaks to the LAZINESS and DISHONESTY of Heather and her acolytes that they did no homework.
Sandra, I lived there, watching oil barges destroy the wetlands and the shrimp and oysters of those who had made their living supplying them and eating them for two centuries (and maybe longer). I knew a Corps of Engineers guy whose life was destroyed by his love of his state and his inability to bear what was happening to its core.
Thank you, Virginia. I left Florida for much the same reason. Total enactment of Joni Mitchell's Big Yellow Taxi (aka: They Paved Paradise and Put Up a Parking Lot)
Meanwhile, our tax dollars go to rebuild beaches in front of millionaire's houses
Indeed. And subsidize their flood insurance. North Carolina's coast is a good example. They're beginning to question allowing people to build right up to the water's edge (Rodanthe)!! At least two houses have disappeared into the drink so far this year. Barrier islands are, almost by definition, impermanent.
I am remembering that many of those living in Southern LA were living in lowlands that had to be reclaimed as marsh to restore the natural ecology. it is my understanding that they should not be returning to lands that they lived on even for generations, lands that need to be restored as marsh to absorb the waters coming downstream. Correct me if you please. The same is true on the others coasts as we get into more climate change.
This ruling was made for, and by, corporations. It is the essence of fascism. I am sure, even without doing the research, that the people who destroyed these wetlands in Idaho weren’t just building a porch. They also probably don’t vote for the Democratic Party. (fixed)
That Idaho couple will be the first to bitch when their well water gets contaminated, I assure you.
Of course they will and they will want government help. Water already is a problem in the West and it's only going to get worse. We are lucky here in Oregon that we got a good snow pack this year. There have been years when we haven't.
Or they get flooded out - wetlands have a tendency to be wet - being adjacent to larger bodies of water their source of water . . .
What a sleazy thing to write.
I sure you didn't bother to read the opinion? Its embarrassing how many people on this site didn't do their homework.
Let's stop lying about the POST
DID YOU READ THE RULING? Of course not.
It was a 9-0 ruling on the merits.
The case was about an Idaho couple s Michael and Chantell Sackett who purchased property near
Priest Lake, Idaho, and began backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare
for building a home. The Environmental Protection Agency informed
the Sacketts that their property contained wetlands and that their
backfilling violated the Clean Water Act, which prohibits discharging
pollutants into “the waters of the United States.” 33 U. S. C. §1362(7).
The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day. The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as “waters of the United States” because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not “waters of the United States.”
AGAIN the Sackets poured DIRT near a ditch, which was near a creek, which was near lake.
ONLY A MORON or Climate activist would would believe this is damaging the enviroment or that it violated the CLEAN WATERS ACT.
The Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacket's
As a separate question the Court disagreed over the language of what constitutes wetlands. By a 5-4 margin the Majority argued the definition language was causing litigation and that Congress needed to tighten up the language.
IT IS A DISGRACFUL that the Supreme Court is accused of gutting the EPA, or harming the environment.
It took me 5 minutes of research to see this who post was a LIE. It speaks to the LAZINESS and DISHONESTY of Heather and her acolytes that they did no homework.
I think you meant to write, “vote Democratic.”
Thoroughly edited. 😊
Fascism? That's when the FBI lies to America about Trump collusion when it was the narrative was bankrolled by The Clinton Campaign or when the CIA/FBI lie about The Hunter Biden laptop. That's fascism.
Its also fascism when you blatantly lie about THE SUPREME COURT ruling.
Did you think NO ONE would check? Even read the opinion?
Let's stop lying about the POST
DID YOU READ THE RULING? Of course not.
It was a 9-0 ruling on the merits.
The case was about an Idaho couple s Michael and Chantell Sackett who purchased property near
Priest Lake, Idaho, and began backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare
for building a home. The Environmental Protection Agency informed
the Sacketts that their property contained wetlands and that their
backfilling violated the Clean Water Act, which prohibits discharging
pollutants into “the waters of the United States.” 33 U. S. C. §1362(7).
The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day. The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as “waters of the United States” because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not “waters of the United States.”
AGAIN the Sackets poured DIRT near a ditch, which was near a creek, which was near lake.
ONLY A MORON or Climate activist would would believe this is damaging the environment or that it violated the CLEAN WATERS ACT.
The Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacket's
As a separate question the Court disagreed over the language of what constitutes wetlands. By a 5-4 margin the Majority argued the definition language was causing litigation and that Congress needed to tighten up the language.
IT IS A DISGRACFUL that the Supreme Court is accused of gutting the EPA, or harming the environment.
It took me 5 minutes of research to see this who post was a LIE. It speaks to the LAZINESS and DISHONESTY of Heather and her acolytes that they did no homework.
And at this point the world economy!
It is hard to separate wetlands from contingent waterways.
Precisely. They are all part of the hydrologic system, and the hydrologic cycle which fills them. And much is underground, in the form of aquifers which are fed by these systems. It's sheer stupidity to believe otherwise.
And to read how farming has now drained the aquifers west of the Rocky Mountains is appalling. I read just last night about sheep farmers in Colorado who have depended on the Colorado River and the attendant aquifers that have been drained in the recent drought and how they are no longer able to irrigate the vast pastures on which they depend.
Which state sold of water rights to the Saudi 's to grow alfalfa to feed their horses : Arizona ???
Sheep farmers may plant grains or vegetables if they get their water back. Ecologically that’s what the EU is doing in hopes of alleviating starvation caused by climate change (caused by pollution).
Well, they sure aren’t afraid of stupidity, are they? I keep being surprised at how often I can still be surprised.
Aren’t
The families that the SCOTUS majority ultimately works for figure that their money will insulate then from any unpleasant outcomes
Yes. I believe this is relatively true too. Whatever bad comes their wealth will shield them from the worst, and therefore they don't care. I also don't really believe they care about their grandchildren or offspring that much. Everyone used to say that the Nazis were mean to Jews and nice to their own families, but I believe that was not true. I think they were mean to everyone. The same is true here. Nicer, but not nice. They don't know how to be caring because they don't care. Caring people steward the planet.
I think a malignant narcissist can treat you very well until you no longer please them, which can just be a matter of whim. Look at how suddenly and completely Trump turns on former allies? We are just toys in their toybox. That's not empathy. Lincoln said "As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy." I think that as he often did, he nailed it, and it that it fair to extend that concept beyond slaver per se to domineering. Yes, we cannot tolerate predatory approaches to to human relations, which is the point, but it's a problem even at the level of family and well as a despotic state. I think we all have the potential to abuse our power over others, and violence occurs in many forms. We also, of necessity, pursue self-interest, but (mostly) temper that urge with conscience and/or compassion.
Yet we all possess a deep survival-oriented "reptile" brain, that has a high degree of veto power over "better angels", and would-be despots exploit that. We see it in the news every day. I think we all have potential for instances of "reptile" behavior, but I think that kids who have been terrified into submission by authoritarian parents are more likely to regard that as normative, and more readily embrace tyrants.
Idiots.
the conservative justices serve Leonard Leo and his cabal not the United States
l
Exactly! The conservative justices of SCOTUS are nothing but lackeys of Leo and his Federalist Society.
Let's stop lying about the POST
DID YOU READ THE RULING? Of course not.
It was a 9-0 ruling on the merits.
The case was about an Idaho couple s Michael and Chantell Sackett who purchased property near
Priest Lake, Idaho, and began backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare
for building a home. The Environmental Protection Agency informed
the Sacketts that their property contained wetlands and that their
backfilling violated the Clean Water Act, which prohibits discharging
pollutants into “the waters of the United States.” 33 U. S. C. §1362(7).
The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day. The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as “waters of the United States” because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not “waters of the United States.”
AGAIN the Sackets poured DIRT near a ditch, which was near a creek, which was near lake.
ONLY A MORON or Climate activist would would believe this is damaging the enviroment or that it violated the CLEAN WATERS ACT.
The Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacket's
As a separate question the Court disagreed over the language of what constitutes wetlands. By a 5-4 margin the Majority argued the definition language was causing litigation and that Congress needed to tighten up the language.
IT IS A DISGRACFUL that the Supreme Court is gutting the EPA, or harming the environment.
It took me 5 minutes of research to see this who post was a LIE. It speaks to the LAZINESS and DISHONESTY of Heather and her acolytes that they did no homework.
James, in spite of your hostility, I appreciate that you did prompt me to read much of the split decision opinion, and look at the disagreements between the justices. For you to act like this is obviously an idiotic thing for people to be disturbed about seems rather strange. None of us know how many millions of acres of wetlands may now become more polluted.
A point Justice Kagan made here is that having a law (passed, BTW, in a bipartisan manner in Congress) be "broad" does not mean that it is "vague". Thus saying "there's a need to use much clearer language", is BS, to her thinking in this case. Congress in 1972 INTENDED for the power of the EPA to be broad.
The five justices taking upon themselves to redefine what should be the limits of the Clean Water Act , based on "clarity of language", is at least very questionable. Whatever happened to the idea that activist judges were an anathema to conservatives?
From an ecological standpoint, you tell us what makes more sense: a) water that sometimes flows into other water should NOT be regulated because there's not a "continuous" connection "on the surface", or b) water that connects to larger bodies of water either underground or part of the year can have major downstream environmental safety effects? Why was Justice Kavanaugh willing to split from the 5 "shrink the federal govt" zealots on this?
Dude. You posted this seven times and then I got bored and quit counting. Switch to decaf.
On the issue itself, it is not moronic to insist people obey the law on wetlands. The Sacketts did not and were properly sanctioned. At the time of their action, their backfill DID violate the Clean Water Act. And contrary to your sneering, backfilling wetlands does damage the environment, by making it more difficult of us to manage floods and recharge aquifers.
SCOTUS made the illegal legal. Fine, that's SCOTUS' job. So the Sacketts can proceed. I hope others use this decision to understand the value of keeping wetlands intact on their property whenever possible. It helps us all.
Please call them “Radical.” They are not conservative. “Conservatives” conserve. Radicals destroy. Keep thinking of the French mob and that of January 6th.
100%
Agreed. In fact, given the recent revelation that the Catholic Church in Illinois has almost 2000 additional cases of clergy abusing children that has been unreported since 1950, I have been wondering why we allow churches tax exemptions and nonProfit status at all. How is that separation of church and state? I personally think the Catholic church should be shut down it is doing so much harm. Their infiltration into the health care services and taking over of hospitals all over the country, has made it difficult for women to get birth control or abortions or any health procedure connected to stem cell research even in states that do not place restrictions on any of these activities. The Opus Dei/ Federalist Society is a well organized mob like danger to our nation. They are terrorists in their actions.
Linda, read Playing God: American Catholic Bishops and the Far Right, by Mary Jo McConahay. Excellent look at how this has all unfolded. Not so much the clerical abuse but the roots of the religious right and the involvement of wealthy Catholic conservatives who finance the partisan politics of the mostly anti- Pope Francis Bishops. I think they have crossed the church/state separation line many times in recent years.
Let's stop lying about the POST
DID YOU READ THE RULING? Of course not.
It was a 9-0 ruling on the merits.
The case was about an Idaho couple s Michael and Chantell Sackett who purchased property near
Priest Lake, Idaho, and began backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare
for building a home. The Environmental Protection Agency informed
the Sacketts that their property contained wetlands and that their
backfilling violated the Clean Water Act, which prohibits discharging
pollutants into “the waters of the United States.” 33 U. S. C. §1362(7).
The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day. The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as “waters of the United States” because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not “waters of the United States.”
AGAIN the Sackets poured DIRT near a ditch, which was near a creek, which was near lake.
ONLY A MORON or Climate activist would would believe this is damaging the enviroment or that it violated the CLEAN WATERS ACT.
The Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the Sacket's
As a separate question the Court disagreed over the language of what constitutes wetlands. By a 5-4 margin the Majority argued the definition language was causing litigation and that Congress needed to tighten up the language.
IT IS A DISGRACFUL that the Supreme Court is gutting the EPA, or harming the environment.
It took me 5 minutes of research to see this who post was a LIE. It speaks to the LAZINESS and DISHONESTY of Heather and her acolytes that they did no homework.
We know that one of them has a string of young children.
Pig farms near or in wild bird habitat. What could go wrong? Epidemiologist have traced the 1918 Pandemic to Haskil KS where wild migratory birds came into contact with pig livestock. Horses, pigs, birds are reservoirs of influenza. Each ring is like a layered defense for us humans. The biggest danger to our immunity is when a novel strain skips a species and starts kills humans. Without wet lands we loose our layered defense. The supreme courts decision has National Security ramifications. Too bad federalist society libertarians have not read a book.
I would expect that a higher level of proof will be required to demonstrate that ground waters are affected by manure runoff or pcb seepage from industrial scale feedlots and "private" industrial disposal sites. This is quite a terrifying decision as it will be cited in favor of open dumping, strip mining, oils waste, and you name whatever private sector enterprise that produces toxins from extraction through production through recycling and disposal. Next to clean air protections, safe water has been sacrosanct since the 1970s. Damn. Maybe I should open up that acreage I have been maintaining as pristine valley and forest to folks willing to pay for someplace out in rural America to truck in waste and nasty stuff as my lowlands are not contiguous to any surface streams or waterways. Can imagine the brouhaha that'd come up at town meetings and raised with Wisconsin DNR, though DNR no longer can in estimate private property issues.
They are so important in helping the damage caused by extreme weather as well. The Stench Court and their sponsors are so greedy that they think their money will save them from the destruction they are aiding and abetting. Once again I am thankful I am as old as I am with no direct descendants.
Wow, i’m 75 and have no children either. And sadly, I’ve often been thankful for that. Today is one of those days.
I understand and I just turned 80. I now have ex-students who are considering not having children or have stopped at one. These problems with climate change have been obvious for a long time to those who have been paying attention. Then there is my sister's family....I am great great aunt to at least ten or possibly more kids.
I wish we were neighbors. I'd like very much to sit and talk over a cup of coffee with you. Be well.
Someday our people of child-bearing age who want children will begin to adopt the millions of orphans that war and climate change have left unprotected. May the day come sooner rather than later. It will take changes in adoption laws, but if we can get a Democratic “wave” in ‘24 and another in ‘28, some thinking about the future might just take place. (Republicans currently seem incapable of thought.)
It's impossible to allow private parties to backfill or pollute their "private property" without it affecting the ground water many miles away. I'm sure the SC knows this but doesn't care. They've proven time and again that they care about nothing and nobody.
We on Cape Cod understand that all of our water comes from our single-source aquifer. Right now, one fight is to deny permits for a machine gun range that will pollute our aquifer. The other fight is to keep Holtec, the company decommissioning the Pilgrim Nuclear Plant, from dumping a million gallons of contaminated water in Cape Cod Bay. The greed of both companies and individuals seems boundless and their understanding of the consequences of their proposed actions is non-existent.
They understand. They simply do not care.
In Indiana District 8 last year we had Ray McCormick a Democrat run against Larry Bucshon a Republican. One of Ray's talking points was saving the wetlands. He grew up on a farm in Southern Indiana and continues to farm. He had also worked under the Obama administration. He would have been an asset whereas....we have do nothing no show Bucshon. He is show up for the tornado that devastated Sullivan, IN and and the photo opps with do nothing Todd Young! I am sure we paid for their trip to walk around Sullivan. Yep! Indiana is a RED STATE! I cry!
I think they are completely wedded to a rigid and outdated worldview that values man and money above everything and everyone else. They simply do not care about anything else.
Oh they f**king just think they can pray, and their children and grandchildren will be fine.
Once again the majority on the so-called but hardly “Supreme” Court not only promote pro business etc rulings
Sorry this posted before finished-
but also show once again like Dobbs they think themselves well enough educated and qualified to rule on technical issues well (no pun intended) outside areas remotely within their expertise. Any college graduate or possibly even high school student exposed to even a smudgeon of ecology or environmental studies would understand the connectedness of waterways of all shapes and konds within an ecosystem. But no the folks who passed that decision would not have passed an elementary (ahem) science test on the subject. I guess they’re confident of being experts on everything that comes their way. Egregious.
The conservative judges are pro-business and without regulations businesses only care about profit. Profits over people, environment, climate. They couldn't care less. I guess they figure they will be pushing daisies by the time the chickens come home to roost. The irony is that most of those CEOs had to have been part of the environmental movement in the 70s. But let us not forget that they can rationalize anything to justify their greed.
They are not conservatives, they are radicals. That’s the problem. It’s misused language, a tool of the Far Right.
The entire "Republican" Party is now completely owned by sociopathic avarice. Anything is up for sacrifice if it satisfies the obsessive greed of their patrons.
I was wondering what elemennts create Stuart Rhodes, and recalling how a returned Viet Nam vet sprang out of bed and was on his feet, pointing a gun at his mother who had tapped on his door to call him to breakfast. Stuart Rhodes is also a US military graduate:
https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2022/05/12/exclusive-oath-keepers-leader-stewart-rhodes-children-speak#:~:text=In%20February%2C%20Hatewatch%20met%20with,19%2C%20in%20Kalispell%2C%20Montana.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63709446
Stewart Rhodes' son: ‘How I escaped my father’s militia’ - BBC News
Thanks for sharing Susan, there is hope for these peoples minds being saved.
This Court is WAY overstepping ing its bounds. It is nullifying laws passed by Congress and signed by the President, essentially making themselves an unelected cabal with little accountability. I would refer everyone to The Hartmann Report written by Thom Hartmann, on Substack. He does an excellent job of explaining how the radical justices are overstepping the bounds of the Court, that Congress can regulate it as Congress "created" the Court using the parameters listed in the Constitution. Ironically, the SCOTUS says it can't regulate political gerrymandering, but can regulate decisions of Congress protecting the common good of the country. At least 5 of them should be impeached for corruption.
Indeed, the irony of it all, right wing cherry picking!
I am at least somewhat relieved to hear we may have recourse against the ignorance,greed, and corruption of this court. We have pandered to business so much over the past forty years that this is what we get--Existential threats to health, education, welfare, and the common good.
There is no safeguards for any of us, our way of life or our future. SCOTUS has become a Republican instrument of what appears to be our Democracy’s demise
Well said!
Well, when? When? When?????? After all our water is undrinkable? We have let the most foul ideology pollute our government. Must we tolerate such idiocy . We refuse. We refuse we refuse!!!!! Must we allow fouling our own drinking water? Is this truly sane?
We got rid of Kings! Now get rid of Supreme Court delusion... we have simply given the reins to lunatics.
Are we just going to sit back and blather, or are we really demanding that our laws rule. Not the other way around. 😱☠️
And thank you for “radical.”
Yes, birds nest and raise their young in wetlands. A Sand County Almanac is a classic, much like Rachel Carson's books about the seashore, except it is inland.
YES! I have a family of sandhill cranes in my neighborhood (SE Michigan). My home abuts a wonderful wetland. Today - again - I thank the voters of Michigan for our wonderful leaders here.
This is just horrifying. As if birds and other wildlife aren’t already under threat due to development, the use of pesticides, and so on. Why do these people want to destroy the earth?!
Because they can.
What happens to wildlife effects our natural protection from “spillover” as well. Wetlands serve us in more than one way. Both 1918 and 2020 Pandemics demonstrate these facts.
But Russia doesn't care, and they are pulling the Reoubliconned strings.
THIS IS TOO STUPID TO BELIEVE. Did you read the ruling?
The Sackets were back filling a lot with dirt, near a ditch, which fed creek, which fed into a lake. Not only is this NOT covered by the CLEAN WATERS ACT, Its utter STUPID to believe that pouring DIRT on your lot to level it out for building IS DESTROYING WETLANDS.
The Court agreed 9-0
In a seperate issue, they disagreed (5-4) about whether Congress needed to clarify its
language what constituted CLEAN WATERS of the US. The majority felt that the ambiguous language was causing litigation. THEY asked Congress to tighten up its LANGUAGE.
Its A LIE that this is destroying American wetland or gutting the EPA.
What I don't get is why, when nine unelected people rule, we all just have to throw up our hands and say, "OK, whatever you say, boss." What would happen if the feds just ignored the court on this?
In New Jersey, we have our own wetlands protection act, and state EPA, so this will not affect our state, for now. ( I hope).The decision by the SCOTUS does set the stage for weakening our rules, should our state GOP, gain control here. ( not likely) Local activism brought about our own protections and I hope other states follow as well.
Jack while being glad your state has some wetlands protection in place despite any gutting of the EPA, I fear that what is and will be essential in trying to effectively roll back effects of climate change does not respect state lines or even international boundaries. Earth is an ecosystem as a whole which, while having some natural boundaries (mountains, continents) the oceans and rivers cross even those boundaries freely joining us all regardless of our specific state and federal governments. This is what makes Biden's political and diplomatic efforts so essential to making a difference in our striving toward a more stable world both climatically as well as politically. He has and continues to reach out to engage others as far as he can.
Very true, but as long as the radicals are in charge of the SCOTUS, local action is the only option, as inadequate as that may be. Biden needs to reshape the court, or they will continue to take us backward.
Wait until they declare that federal environmental law preempts state law, I'm sure that's part of their wish list.
Yep.
That is encouraging. We need to band together to defeat these ignorant tyrants now.
I asked the same thing about the debt ceiling. It seems the government can always come up with money. The debt ceiling seems dumb to me since it's always raised. Why even have it? It seems to exist only for Republicans to complain about spending when they aren't in the majority and can't do whatever they want, or to hold hostage when they aren't in power. Their "cuts" will ADD, not cut, the deficit, while hurting less fortunate Americans, including their own constituents.
BC -- "I asked the same thing about the debt ceiling. It seems the government can always come up with money."
"𝘞𝘩𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘐 𝘸𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘣𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘴... 𝘢 𝘯𝘶𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘭𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘳 𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘨𝘪𝘴𝘵. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴: '𝘐𝘧 𝘐 𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘰𝘸 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘺 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘯𝘬, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘯𝘬 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘴 𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘱𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘺 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬. 𝘞𝘩𝘺 𝘪𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵? 𝘞𝘩𝘺 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘸𝘦 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱 𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘸𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘰𝘸𝘦 $31 𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘰𝘯?'” --Paul Krugman
Just about every economist will reply that it’s misleading to make an analogy between household and government finances. We often aren’t clear enough about why, perhaps because we don’t say it bluntly enough. So here’s the difference: You are going to get old and eventually die. The government isn’t.
And lenders therefore demand that individual borrowers pay off their debts while they still have the income to do so.
Governments, on the other hand, normally see their revenues rise, generation after generation, as the economies they regulate and tax grow:
In fact, when governments for one reason or another run up large debts, it is, as far as I can tell, unusual to pay those debts off.
The most famous example, albeit one that many people apparently don’t know about, is the debt America incurred to fight World War II. By the war’s end, this debt was around 100 percent of gross domestic product — roughly comparable to the debt level today. So how did we pay off that debt?
We didn’t.
By the end of the Napoleonic Wars, the British government’s debt, according to Bank of England estimates, was 184 percent of G.D.P. — far above America’s debt at the end of World War II.. So how did Britain pay off its Napoleonic debt?
It didn’t.
In much more recent history, when governments were mistakenly pursuing fiscal austerity in the face of high unemployment, I used to accuse deficit scolds of being obsessed with Victorian virtues. I was, I now realize, being unfair to the Victorians.
So for all those whose instinct is to assume that a responsible government would, like a responsible individual, pay off its debts as soon as it can, again:
𝙂𝙤𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙣𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨 𝙖𝙧𝙚𝙣’𝙩 𝙡𝙞𝙠𝙚 𝙥𝙚𝙤𝙥𝙡𝙚. 𝙄𝙛 𝙙𝙚𝙖𝙩𝙝 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙩𝙖𝙭𝙚𝙨 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙤𝙣𝙡𝙮 𝙨𝙪𝙧𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙜𝙨 𝙞𝙣 𝙡𝙞𝙛𝙚, 𝙬𝙚𝙡𝙡, 𝙙𝙚𝙖𝙩𝙝 𝙞𝙨𝙣’𝙩 𝙖𝙣 𝙞𝙨𝙨𝙪𝙚 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙜𝙤𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙣𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨, 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙩𝙖𝙭𝙚𝙨 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙖𝙣 𝙖𝙨𝙨𝙚𝙩 — 𝙖 𝙜𝙧𝙤𝙬𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙖𝙨𝙨𝙚𝙩 — 𝙧𝙖𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙣 𝙖 𝙡𝙞𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮.
https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/template/oakv2?campaign_id=116&emc=edit_pk_20230519&instance_id=92982&nl=paul-krugman&productCode=PK®i_id=16231639&segment_id=133389&te=1&uri=nyt%3A%2F%2Fnewsletter%2F02ae41d9-4b4d-5d95-afee-38d0a94fe803&user_id=85f8e7210ecfab1cfc218636352e8ddc&fbclid=IwAR2aRcuYMH_gL3HzvCWUNUPOoilhHsb3JcOIznc_bxWMNziBVBeIvrjPPq8
Thank you!
I know it seems like a really dumb reason, but I think you answered your own question: the debt ceiling exists so that the out-of-power party can complain about the budget and gum up the works. It's intentionally introduced friction, and I'm still mulling over it's usefulness. It falls in the same category as the filibuster -- why have a rule that deliberately makes it more difficult to govern? I'm not sure I'm wise enough to answer.
Nor am I. Sometimes it seems common sense should prevail more often.
Actually, they have no other goal than cutting taxes again and again for the wealthy ( some of whom said the didn’t need them) and empowering their “base”. This is not patriotism, this is suicide.
The Radicalized Extreme Court of the United States, “Rec Us” has assumed unlimited control of our laws via their “interpretations” of laws on the books for 50 years. They are literally rewriting the law by surpassing a filibustered Senate that now passes nothing at all. They are the new Super Branch of Government and cannot be voted out
Authoritarianism by default
Exactly. The Disgraced Roberts Court is acing as a super legislature without any checks or balances. The laughable fact that Thomas can remain on the court after egregious failures of ethics and violations of Federal law has completely delegitimized it.
Indeed, and as they gain more power iur democracy evaporates in a legal coup
DISAPPEARED...
That sleeping dog?
On September 10th 2001, I wrote to a friend comparing our democracies to him. And commenting: "One doubts our survival instincts".
Eleven days earlier I'd written to the same friend saying we're sleepwalkers on the edge of the abyss.
Still the same drugged sleep, still the same nightmare.
A chain reaction nightmare -- escape from one madness into another, from one Chamber of Horrors into a worse one.
Time for ten million Paul Reveres to awaken and ride!
Dear Peter,
Your apt description of our nightmare helps me know I am not alone in my terror. Thanks for that.
I do wonder if Paul could even wake us from our sleep of denial.
We are a drugged Nation. Simply overdosing on our own demise.
SCOTUS is sending a message: the majority is as Radical as the party of the presidents and the majority on the judiciary committees who chose them. They could have been out with flagpoles on January 6th. Sorry to put it in plain English, but to destroy our water and food supply in a time of climate change must have our allies trembling and Putin laughing.
Ted, this right here. I cannot fathom that wetlands, which (at least to my way of thinking) serve as the environment's digestive system in filtering and feeding the area. No, you cannot build on undrained wetlands, but they are there for an environmental reason.
Exactly. For us to be healthy, we need a healthy and diverse ecosystem. This Scutus is an abomination.
Did you read the case? The posts here are getting stupider by the minute.
The Sackett's sued the EPA over pouring dirt on their land to level it out before they built a house. The land was near a ditch, which was near creek, which was near a lake. Only a moron would think violated the EPA Clean Waters Act, let alone was an environmental hazard.
MY PROOF? The Court voted 9-0.
As a side issue, the court disagreed (5-4) going forward on the whatr constituted wetlands. There were conflicts in the statue that was causing needless litigation. The majority asked Congress to tighten up the language.
Stop being lazy and do your homework. It took me 5 minutes of homework to realize this was all BS.
Chip, chip, chip.
Precedent reset.
Seeing the wooden handle, The trees were fooled at first, mistakenly trusting the axe.
Dear Ted, please join me in reporting him (…, under his comments).
What a stupid post
Perhaps read The Clean Water Act. You’ll figure it out. Maybe.
I'm sorry but this MAY BE the stupidest LAZIEST post of ALL TIME.
Did anyone bother to read the ruling or the merits? Of course not.
Just cut and paste from Media Matters
First it was INCREDIBLY DISHONEST how you characterized the RULING.
The ruling CAME DOWN 9-0 in favor of plaintiffs Michael and Chantell Sackett, two Idaho residents whom the EPA prohibited from building a home near a wetland years ago.
"The EPA ordered the Sacketts to restore the site, threatening penalties of over $40,000 per day," Alito's majority opinion stated. "The EPA classified the wetlands on the Sacketts’ lot as 'waters of the United States' because they were near a ditch that fed into a creek, which fed into Priest Lake, a navigable, intrastate lake. The Sacketts sued, alleging that their property was not 'waters of the United States.'"
The Sackets had purchased land and were backfilling the lot with dirt to prepare to build.
The lot in question was on a ditch that fed into a a creek, which fed into a lake. Its an incredible stretch to say DIRT used to level out a lot near a ditch, near a creek, near a lake
was a violation of THE CLEAN WATERS ACT.
ONLY A MORON or a CLIMATE ACTIVIST would think so.
BY 9-0 the Court agreed.
As a separate issue the court took up the question of WATERS of the United States
As Ailito wrote "(a) The uncertain meaning of “the waters of the United States” has
been a persistent problem, sparking decades of agency action and litigation. Resolving the CWA’s applicability to wetlands requires a review of the history surrounding the interpretation of that phrase.
However, the court split 5-4 in its analysis of how the federal government should define a water source under the Clean Water Act.
"Understanding the CWA to apply to wetlands that are distinguishable from otherwise covered 'waters of the United States' would substantially broaden [existing statute] to define 'navigable waters' as 'waters of the United States and adjacent wetlands,'" Alito wrote.
“Enact exceedingly clear language” on any rules that affect private property." The majority asked Congress to clarify its language.
THIS IS YET AGAIN A MISTAKE A first year graduate wouldn't make. Your characterization
as gutting the EPA and threatening the climate IS SO DISHONEST I'm at a loss.
Its obvious that all leftist care about is sanctimonious virtue signaling. The truth is NOT a leftwing value.
Next, our national parks and protected lands. The next great sell-off of our national treasures. Soon, sell off all federal buildings and land and rent them back to the Government while that enterprise lasts. Hedge-fund mentality here? You bet. Me thinks a nice new shopping mall for the umber-rich on the site of the Canon Building, which now houses the Congress, would really be nice, he smirks.
SCROTUS, what a nightmare
SCOTUS is so backwards thinking and FRUSTRATING!! I just wanna scream.
Thanks so much Heather for all your efforts. They are not wasted.
That's not backwards thinking. It's aggressive right-wing agenda. It's getting rapidly worse.
The radically aggressive right wing agenda is taking the US back to the Gilded Age. Robber barons have always needed to be held in check, or their sociopathic greed would stomp all over everyone else. No one thinks they are entitled like the rich.
You're so right.
And I hate it.
It's as if these idiot justices flunked science class in high school. But we know the real truth, don't we? They have been bought by the Oligarchs who rule this country.
They have indeed. And they will destroy us all without batting an eye. Not just us but every living thing that gets in their way.
The concept of freedom in this country is being morphed by the Republicans and the right wing SCOTUS majority. Equal treatment under the law and the principle that personal freedoms extend only so far as the point where they impinge on another's freedoms and well-being is being thrown out of the window. It is occurring across a wide front--restrictions on what can be taught, how people can dress, books being banned, regulations to protect health and safety of the population as a whole, restrictions on voting, access to healthcare and bodily autonomy in the case of abortion aaccess and gender affirming care, and even the institution of laws in red states elevating Christianity as a state religion.
Every day there is new evidence of the erosion of freedom in this country. For every win like the Stewart Rhodes conviction and sentencing there are broader counterbalancing losses like the gutting of the ability of the EPA to protect all of us in the name of dismantling hte administrative "deep state."
The concept of freedom is being distorted and perverted as Republicans are pushing the advantage they have crafted over the past 40 years to gerrymander and adjudicate themselves into minority rule and to obliterate the concept of one person, one vote.
The bullies are acting with impunity almost unchecked at this point. And there is no real freedom where bullies rule.
Bullies, and that is exactly what they are, have sociopathically tried to rule the world for eons. Freedom is a product of good faith, solidarity, and keeping them at bay. I think we all harbor Jekyll and Hyde to some degree, so the problem is never defeated for good; but we can battle abuses of power in the short term and cultivate awareness and empathy as a protective strategy into the future. It is clear we have come to a point of crisis. Technology amplifies our our power to do, and can be helpful and healing, or predatory.
JL GRAHAM, wise words for today and everyday.
I am so grateful for President Joe Biden and the generous attitude he demonstrates even as he is unfairly lied about and condemned. We could not have a better, wise, compassionate and experienced person as our leader.
It has also been great to see seasoned leadership as well as new and upcoming younger leaders, within the Democratic Party, taking more responsibility for governing and building up our nation, with the support and guidance of their seniors.
We must vote, we must serve in anyway we are able, we must kindly and respectfully speak truth to our friends with clarity. These are dangerous days. Our enemy is powerful and "hungry for MORE!" Our enemy is not kind and polite but rather is seeking unbridled control that includes all the riches of this country (including our wetlands) and the souls of its people.
This enemy is literally everywhere. For instance, I was looking for a book for my grandaughter....the books were in the Christian section.....both were compiled/written by young women who were in Trump's administration. I was horrified! ....needless to say I did NOT buy those books.....but sad to say the "wrong"wing of our government has /is brainwashing so many who are not able to think on their own.......the ropes of totalitarianism are tightening.......WE CAN NOT SLEEP!!!!!
Ok. So what do we do? If power begets more power how does it stop before it has total control. Government contracts will be issued only to those that are compliant and complicit with those in power. Voting laws and gerrymandering become instituted to make sure those that win elections are those the extremist want to be elected. The USA will “look” like a Democracy because there is voting but the outcome will be rigged. Laws (some already in place) will require Christian “values” be implemented in every government agency, school, etc you name it. The Christian right wing” SCOTUS judges in the majority has begun to legislate from the bench and will continue to do so. As all these continue to manifest Democracy in the USA will be lost. Illiberal Democracy/ Christian Democracy like that in Hungary will be here. It’s already well on it’s way there here in the USA. So what do we do? Expressing our concerns, venting our frustrations here and other places online is all well and good, we need to have a place to unload the emotional impact of current events, but other than it offering some momentary relief, that’s all it is, momentary relief. It’s good to know we are among other of like mind but where do we go from here. What do we do? It’s looking more and more line the Christian Nationalists are slowly but surely taking over our country. The slow moving coup of the right wing Christian extremists that’s been underway for years is taking over, state governments, state courts, state voting, state laws, state legislative bodies, and the federal government legislative bodies (Congress and the Senate) and federal courts are moving in this direction too, and have been for years. So what do we do? If the system becomes more and more rigged for the right wing extremists/ christian nationalists, what if anything can we do?
Well put. I fret over this daily. Tired of complaining how bad things are. Few seem to care. I've been on the streets protesting. Pitiful turn outs. I've gone to DC to protest. Again, pitiful turnouts. I've gone door to door in voter drives. Ineffectual. I'm discouraged. I know that's what they are counting on. But when you put in all the time and effort -- both physically and emotionally -- and no one pays attention (especially the "media", which is failing us as well) it's disheartening to say the least.
The oligarchs have been very successful in dividing Americans against each other. The only path I see forward is to start talking about the fact that it's not about right versus left, but rather the wealthy and powerful against the rest of us. That is the only message I see a chance of getting through. Maybe even that isn't enough and our American Democracy is doomed. So sad.
And why isn't Biden getting on national telvision and addressing the Nation about the debt ceiling? A bit of leadership would be heartening.
Joe needs to do exactly that. Time for some "fireside chats" with clear, irrefutable facts. Thanks Dan Stipe for your activist protests, and never be frustrated for doing something to create social change. And Voting.
Professor Richardson should be hired by the DNC to write them for Joe.
This really resonates with me and I have been thinking along these same line all morning. Perhaps one of the creepiest parts of these right wing is their supposed allegiance to “Christian values.” They make a bullying mockery of Christianity and try to force it down our throats. This will be an ugly battle, but one worth fighting.
When South Carolina passed the 6-week abortion ban, articles declared lawsuits will surely follow. I thought about the religious organizations whose laws protect a women's right to choose. The Episcopal Church is one of them. What if those denominations banded together to bring legal action challenging laws that deny our religious freedoms? Right now we are all forced to comply with Catholic doctrine, superseding many other faiths. Legal actions by organizations powerful enough to stand their ground and win might be worth a try.
So few Americans seem to understand the “faith” of our Founding Fathers. Maybe some would look up “Deists” and “deism” to get some understanding of the “science” that gave US democracy. It was freedom from being ruled as the Radical Republicans of today want to rule. (Of course we had the Puritans too. They seem ascendant today.)
Exactly.
Wilbur’s SCROTUS is the penisultimate! (To be anatomically accurate, Sotomayor, Kegan, and Jackson are not pricks.)
I have loved using SCROTUS. To those who say that my junior high brain is in overdrive, I say that it simply stands for Supreme Court (Reactionary) of the United States.
Ally How many SCROTUS justices does it take to screw the American public? Five with another one to tighten the screw.
Yup
Please watch your language. De Sanctimonious will come for you if de Trump doesn’t get you first.🤣
Virginia I’m shaaaaaking in my walker with cane raised high (or low?).
Keep your cane raised midway.....a whackamole to the masculine midsection! Or in the case of MTG, Kari Lake, etc, the feminine midsection equally targeted. Darn, forgot Boebert
Becoming too many to count or imagine disastrous consequences of absurd actions....
Great name, Wil!
Is this why Neil Gorsuch was put on the court? His mother's revenge.
Yes. Agree. They are becoming a domestic terrorist group of sorts.
It's hard to grasp how a Supreme Court could systematically dismantle prior court rulings, laws, and regulations that have been in place for a half-century. The overturning of Roe vs. Wade was, of course, the court's signature blow to long-established rights and freedoms. And now a majority of justices are turning the clock back once again, this time gutting a key aspect of environmental regulations protecting waterways.
Having grown up mostly in Florida and basked in its water-everywhere wonders as a child and adult, I have a deep appreciation for wetlands, including how they protect us in many ways. The ruling, typical of this court, is arcane and shows no concern for what's at stake at a time when the planet and its people are under dire threat from climate change.
Clean water is a gift that makes Earth livable for all of its inhabitants. What makes it legal for a private property owner to destroy something so essential to us all? And if this court insists on Congress enacting rules and regulations rather than agencies of the executive branch, we know where we're headed.
Florida fertilizer industry is destroying Florida’s aquifer with toxic waste from massively leaking pools of its toxic waste and with millions of gallons of its hydrofluosilisic acid we add to 70% of the public water in the U.S.
Repubs listened to Rachel Carson, now they have no ears for any but the ones who tried to smear her with the most egregious lies. Be very afraid
And by extension the sugar cartel, which even today gets protections from Uncle Sam.
I, too, grew up in Florida, back in the good old days, before 6 gillion people moved in, in the name of 'progress', but after the Army Corp of Engineers had redesigned much of South Florida to suit farmers and other business interests. In cutting those canals, they also cut the Everglades ability to regulate itself, but they didn' know or care about that. I suspect that a peat fire that was burning when I left in 1971 is still burning...................
“Roads in Florida could soon include phosphogypsum — a radioactive waste material from the fertilizer industry — under a bill lawmakers have sent to Gov. Ron DeSantis.”
https://www.npr.org/2023/05/09/1174789570/florida-roads-radioactive-paving-phosphogypsum
What could possibly go wrong???? Unbelievable…oh wait, they’re doing it.
Thanks for the article.🙏
Why would anyone do that? Floridians have been given the gift of beauty and they are destroying it for their own personal amusement. That is sickening.
Not to mention the sugar industry's devastation of the Everglades. Or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers straightening the Kissimmee River, turning it into a canal — a grievous mistake now being corrected. https://www.saj.usace.army.mil/Media/Images/igphoto/2001001716/
That is so beautiful to see. A river enabled to reclaim it's rightful path, with room to adapt as currents change. Soon the riparian zone and flood plain will repair itself, recreating the flood protection and filtering properties of a healthy riverine systems
That is so sad 😞
We visit Florida regularly to visit my wife's family. The canals that at one time teemed with dolphins and manatees are cesspools. The Banana and Indian Rivers are an entirely different color than a few years ago. The stench from fish die outs is overwhelming some years. As I understand it, construction of locks for cruise and container ships prevent the normal ebb and flow of the ocean - which used to flush the system. Now, all that fertilizer runoff just sits and creates algae blooms, removing oxygen from the water as well as poisoning everything.
If the Extreme Court wanted to do something positive for the planet rather than filling the pockets of their puppeteers, they would hear cases suing the corporate monsters who are killing our environment - for profit.
The residents don't notice?
Of course! But Florida is run by developers and large corporations who have had a free reign forever. People want their food cheap and lawns green. Which means they use and produce a lot of fertilizer. Which kills fish and all manner of aquatic life.
Our family is in Cocoa, Merritt Island and Melbourne. Your memories are beautifully expressed. With every visit, the waters seem worse. Sad.
Beautiful, Michael. Thank you.
They want to go back to feudalism. Perhaps the "Dark Ages".
At least, the "Dark Ages" had a much newer and more resilient planet to live on.
One planet - none other...
Not much newer, but less used up. I am reminded of some of the emails that came to light in the Subprime Crash, that some in ill-fated banks knew that the ice was getting thin, but could not bear to mess with such a profitable con game.
It's called the Dark Ages because the light of Rome went out, and there's very little written record from the period. But I guarantee they were far more enlightened than the GOP.
This is true, Holly. The renaissance grew out of the freedom of the so-called "Dark Ages", which gave people the flexibility to experiment, recreate, and begin other ways of existing. I'm not an expert on that era, but one of my daughters is, and she says that ordinary people had more freedom and were more creative then than the times before or after. Our histories tend to focus on written records and on the lives of prominant people, but as we all know, the real progress grows out of regular folks.
This Court is trying to tell Congress what to do. It's gross overreach.
You are so right, the right wing justices are appointing themselves and what they represent into an ideological reversal of what has been established law for over two generations. The political alignment is patently obvious. This is open warfare, without a doubt.
Arcane is just the word I have been searching for all morning. There is something seriously wrong with these people. I am an artist, a gardener, a hiker, a teacher, a mother and now a grandmother. I can’t imagine having so little concern for people, the , environment, and the amazing plants and creatures we share our planet with. These people have no sense of awe , wonder,or humility. This is as dangerous as it is ugly.
It's remarkable and tragic how much damage Trump and McConnell have wrought by packing the Supreme Court. At least two of the appointments shouldn't have been theirs to make,
Rhodes is going away for 18+ years and I couldn’t be happier except, it should’ve been longer. This horrible specimen of a man is getting what is coming to him. In fact, he might need another patch for his other eye. The horrors his ex-wife and children lived through are enough to make you regurgitate. His cohorts will be sentenced also. I cry no tears for them but will dance upon their graves whenever that time comes, no matter how old I am. The same goes for Trump and Company. May they all reap the benefits that Tarrio and Rhodes just received.
No negotiations on debt ceiling. Certainly, one can not reason with irrational people such as the Freedom Caucus. DeSantis is a joke, a dunce. He will pardon people “aggressively”? There should not be any chances that lil’ Hitler will win a nomination. Nor should Trump. He belongs behind many bars.
They are courting the evil, and will do anything to win. They will pardon all who should be jailed, and jail all their enemies. I’m sure a list has already been made.
Marlene I think what Elmer needs is treatment more than damnation. His family had to live with the paranoia inherent in someone with manic fantasies of power and being a "savior." He needed to control everyone he could to prop up a worldview wrapped around his perceived role which would allow him to fend off the possibility that he may actually have had an episodic mental illness. Those with bipolar disorder frequently if not characteristically reject any notion that their feelings are the result of illness and regularly resist treatment or discontinue treatment once begun. It will be interesting to see if some treatment can materialize within the confines of incarceration. It is not for nothing that his son Dakota used the words "manic activity" throughout his descriptions of home life with Elmer. (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63709446)
Well, Elmer may have lost his mind and his family, but at least he could still buy weapons. But oh no, he's a felon now! The poor man has lost his 2nd Amendment rights, too, the very definition of a powerless white American male. So sad, now he'll just have to serve as an inspiration for the next generation of "freedom fighters" while his bipolar ass rots in prison. (Sorry, but I had to relieve an excess of snark, my supply was getting too high.)
There certainly are times that the pressure valve of snark needs to be relieved. Always good to note when you're doing that. My lapses into "inappropriate language/comparisons are usually blamed on my junior high brain. I have learned to acknowledge that so that my sarcasm does not create a sarchasm into which people fall.
Nice pun, Ally. Much appreciated.
😇
I suspect our current corrupt SCROTUS will overturn any prohibition against felons buying guns. Wait for it.
No apologies necessary 😊
That’s quite an article. I hope we outlive the fear, paranoia, and violence of the right wing. Somehow we must. What a journe the Rhodes family has been on. DT has brought out the very worst in everyone.
Rhodes estranged father was a Marine who left the family when Rhodes was 3 years old.
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2022/05/06/he-hinted-hardened-service-oath-keepers-leaders-military-records-dont-back.html
Rhodes recruitment of vetsI wish I could edit my comments)
0 to 5 is a critical period for full adult development. Interesting that Clarence Thomas suffered similar abandonment olb y his father at a very young age. I wonder what other aspects of childhood trauma they share?
That’s sad but it doesn’t make up for the suffering he’s caused others.
Beautifully said and I agree. There is a lot seriously wrong with these people.
I am terrified by what the “Supreme“ Court is doing. Are we heading towards a very Un-united States of America?
Week after week the “Supremes” roll back one or more legislative improvement that enabled our Government to improve the quality of American life! Our only potential remedy is to add 4 more fair-minded justices. We have to work hard-- each of us who are reading Dr. Heather-- to persuade all eligible 18s to 25s and all eligible women 25 to 44 to register and to turn out in 2024! Please go to www.turnup.us/ and contribute: please....
Ira, While I engage regularly with Gen-Zs and Millennials, I would note, relative to the Presidential election, that the Republican nominee currently need only block Biden from receiving 270 electoral votes to become president. As I expect we all know, if no one reaches 270, the decision moves to the House, wherein Republicans presently control more state delegations than Democrats, each of which would get one vote. Accordingly, because the next Congress would decide the election, we must start identifying delegations that are flippable, particularly seeing that the “No Label” purported bipartisan third party is receiving enormous amounts of dark money from Republican PACs. I mention this, because, aside from galvanizing the youth vote, we need to be excessively strategic at the federal, state, and local levels if we’re to out-organize Republicans, whose tactics for securing minority rule over the will of the majority have been discerningly effective.
Imagine our frustration here in Wisconsin, where we have been living in a severely gerrymandered regime. The balance of power on the Wisconsin Supreme Court recently shifted to a "liberal" majority, so we have at least a glimmer of hope that election fairness can be restored soon. Most of our Republicans don't have anything interesting to say, but they are adept at trickery and deceit. They are very proud of themselves for being able to thwart the will of the majority of voters at the district level -- they dominate both chambers of the legislature, despite getting fewer popular votes in statewide races. We keep hoping the Democrats will figure out ways to persuade rural and small-town voters to stop voting for the Republicans.
David, I can imagine your frustration, and, while I’m probably stating the obvious, I would press Democrats to invest more in rural and small-town communities, to the point people really sense they are being listened to and, hence, come to trust that Democrats, contrary to their counterparts, also will fight hard to remedy legitimate grievances felt by those who too often are the victims of our system’s unevenly distributed resources.
Barbara. wish I could shout your comment from the rooftops. But in lieu of that, I encourage all those reading to watch this clip from Beau of the Fifth Column. This is exactly what you are talking about! He's had several clips lately about Democrats messaging!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYUDl8Em-Dg
When I go to this link, I get something called The Young Turks.
I’m sure that this tactic is the republican “go to.” Chump, etc never let a good way to screw our democracy go to waste. This is as important a comment as I have seen anywhere…
Jeri, I deeply appreciate hearing that my comment struck a chord.
Precisely on point Barbara. Please repeat this message over and over.
@D4N, Thank you for writing. Admittedly, one of my reasons for posting was the hope that together we’d spread the word.
At the end of the day, Barbara, nothing really matters except what you and Ira have just said. Our hope lies in actual strategy. While this forum is full of legitimate complaints (my whining included), the only thing that matters is outvoting the fascist madness.
Barbara I feel what you have laid out is the absolute gameplan for the upcoming election. It's achievable through their setup gerrymandering and voter suppression tactics that they have already implemented.
Linda, I appreciate your comment, and, as I wrote to @D4N, I hope that together we can spread the word.
Barbara: I agree entirely with respect to careful selection of flippable House seats. I’ve analyzed every CD and it comes down to approximately 20 seats dominated by 5 in NY and 4-6 in CA and the rest here and there. Success, as usual, will be determined first by the charisma of the candidates and the relative effectiveness of each candidate’s campaign, but I would argue that 24 fundamentally will be decided by prime issues of abortion rights, gun safety, health care, and the Presidential campaign with women and youth registration/turnout playing critically important roles. If it is Trump vs Joe, I can’t see any significant role for No Labels, do you? If it is neither Trump nor Joe, all bets are off! But I guarantee that the prohibition of abortion and gun massacres will get much worse in battleground states such as FL, NC, GA, TX, TN (yes TN?), and the significance of these issues as national battles for the soul of America will be primary in CA, NY, PA, and in selective CDs in many other states. Democracy itself will be on the line for the future! Democracy vs. authoritarianism! And you and I and everyone else on these marvelous chat threads will have to play key roles in smart and selective donations as well as door to door turnout movements in those battlegrounds. Don’t waste our money and time on candidates who are sure to lose or sure to win! Focus on winning truly marginal races. We can get it done, win back the House, strengthen the Senate majority and save our Democracy!
"Week after week the “Supremes” roll back one or more legislative improvement that enabled our Government to improve the quality of American life!"
Many decades of hard work and collaboration. Like a malicious computer virus coder, Republicans have combed our governmental infrastructure for exploitable weaknesses and have weaponized them to sabotage democracy and the common weal to serve a radically plutocratic agenda.
Ira What a difference two generations make. The Supremes in the 60s was a marvelous Motown group with all members, including Diana Ross, from the Detroit projects.
The current ‘Subpremes’ are white guys in black robes, which may be the new white supremacist garb for the KKK.
I’m recovering from Monday’s hip surgery which is a perfect time to write lots of postcards.
Many thanks and hope you will recover soonish; please refer your friends to www.turnup.us/ thanks
This looks like an excellent group. I will let my friends know. Thank you and thanks for the good wishes.
Many thanks Susan of Troy; these Harvard students are fantastic and very effective as they use paid SnapChat, Instagram and Tic Toc to reach specific ages nonpartisan within specific Selected and only competitive CDs in only competitive states on abortion right and guns or climate change; in other words no waste of $$ on any CDs or States except in nonpartisan competitive areas!! Reach and register literally hundreds of thousands of potential voters in a matter of hours to enable them to register to vote ONLINE in a matter of less than 5 minutes: very successful!! Please contribute folks and it is totally tax deductible!!
Happy to help. I’ll forward this to my neighbor who teaches political science at UCBerkeley.
Hope you recover quickly from the hip surgery, Susan!
Unfortunately, no postcards for me this year. My hands gave out last year after less than a hundred. I have mild Dupuytren's disease and had a flare. Now my fingers are stiff and clumsy. I can hardly write my own signature and that's only with a fountain pen (no pressure needed, unlike ball-points). So looking for other ways to do this. Thinking I'll get my fam together for a few postcard days when the time comes. On good days I should be able to still write out a few. I'd use my printer, but geez, so tacky- and I think not nearly as effective.
Is the Supreme Court untouchable? They don't have wings, harps and halos, and a couple of them are very questionable. We know who got them in there - is it a one-way door? Oh, RBG, RBG...
It has become apparent that the Roberts Court majority decides how they are going to rule, and then they go looking for supporting arguments, ignoring relevant cases etc that would compel them to move in a different direction.
If it's going to be blatantly political, then why not just bring it out into the open? Increase the court by adding many Justices, to become a deliberative body, like the Senate was in days of old. Imagine the House of Representatives and Senate consisting of only nine Members! That's nowhere near enough minds to work out the best course going forward into a better future.
The Congress constitutes a tiny minority of the American People, which is bad enough in an alleged "demockeracy". But now we have an overtly political high court, so why not turn it into a large deliberative body, with perhaps fifty members, maybe one from every state?
With a larger body to pretend to dispassionately contemplate law and precedent, perhaps some among them would offer cogent arguments, thereby shaming the pretenders into doing the right thing.
Five people are establishing legal reality for 330 million Americans for years into the future.
I wish we could have a "Shadow Court", comprised of leading legal scholars, who would hear what the official Supreme Court hears, and then do their own research so that the rest of us could compare what our Shadow Court says with what our Supreme Court says. In the past this might have undermined public faith and confidence in the high court. But since that faith and confidence has become damaged by the Roberts Court, a Shadow Court might help steer the official court to be more diligent and scrupulous.
They already have a shadow docket, another way to screw us all. Me thinks it’s too late for something to make the current crop more “diligent and scrupulous.” That ship has sailed…
I just felt like stirring the pot.
My view is that we accorded great respect to Supreme Court decisions, regardless of whether or not we agree, in order to protect what I want to refer to as the "sanctity" of the SCOTUS. It's much like protecting the "full faith and credit of the United States" for the sake of our monetary system. But if, as you say, that ship has sailed, then it feels like asking our local pharmacist to perform delicate surgery on our innards. If we lose our faith in our long-established institutions, what will become of us? Will we survive long enough to repair the damage? The 45th president* took a wrecking ball to our system, and apparently that process is on-going. So we are watching as our cancer metastasizes, while we are seemingly powerless to cure our malady. It's becoming increasingly difficult to find humor.
I may be a bit off kilter, as the 25th of May was the day in 1971 when I was discharged from active duty in the Army, as a conscientious objector, after having served three years, four months, and seventeen days, including a tour in the war. To watch these people deliberately wrecking our nation -- I have no words for it. But I intend to keep on keepin' on.
Things are bad. And that ain't good.
My father, WWII veteran and college graduate, liked to say "Well, we've survived everything so far. And that's saying a lot."
I’m against allowing each state to choose a Justice. That’s how the Repugnants win the White House despite losing the popular vote. Too many small red states.
Marge, I agree.
I was really only indulging in a flight of whimsy. In Wisconsin we elect Supreme Court Justices by state-wide popular vote. Although we may have the worst gerrymander in the nation, it doesn't matter for state-wide elections. In our recent election in April for Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court we managed to elect an openly "liberal" judge from Milwaukee, which shifts the balance from conservative majority to liberal majority. We hope that our rotten gerrymander case will be heard by our new Supreme Court.
I think I would prefer a system of choosing Justices of the Supreme Court by a bi-partisan, or omni-partisan, panel of legal scholars. We should try to foster and maintain the appearance of impartiality among members of the high court. It must surely be exceedingly difficult for someone like Justice Barrett to separate, in her mind, the difference between her fervently-held religious beliefs and a fair reading of law and precedent. But we must try to remain impartial.
Even "Caesar's wife must be above suspicion."
I'm wearing my RBG socks practically every day now...
GOOD. (A smile at last).
RBG was a great SCJ BUT she was ill and going on in age where heath deteriorates quickly. She should have stepped down under a Democratic President. We carry this burden partly because of her.
We're way past "heading."
Heading??? Surely you jest?
Ha! And please, don't call me Shirley!
My favorite movie line of all time.
Rumack: "Can you fly this plane, and land it?"
Striker: "Surely you can't be serious!?"
Rumack: "I am serious. And don't call me Shirley."
It's truly a classic line, still as pertinent now as it was then.
🤣🤣🤣
What we are headed for is, a fascist, authoritarian un-united states. Like i have said before, i am NOT staying here if that happens. If i stay, the fascists will eventually come for me and do away with me because i am not going along with their fascist, Christian BS. I have never seen such deliberate, insane, irresponsible behavior from human beings as the ones with an ''R'' by their name in our government. Looney tunes to the maximum extreme..
Yes, Til. Yes we are...
We are there
Divide and conquer.
It is a possibility, Til,
Anyone laboring under the myth that our democracy was/is safe because the Dems are in the White House and very marginally control the Senate should thoroughly digest Heather’s column today AND ponder Biden’s poll numbers….and the SCOTUS ruling on clean water….we are on the edge of anarchy and inching closer, daily. Democracy is very close to being held ‘hostage’….
Damn, it already is, and most people still go waltzing through their lives
I am beginning to think as long as (a lot? many? most?) have a smartphone in their hand and scan scroll all day long looking at the (f'ing) Kardashians or whatever junk is trending on Twitter, they won't give a damn.
Religion used to be the opiate of the people. Now it is social media.
So true! And then will blame Biden for everything and either won’t vote or will vote against him, because they are clueless, refusing to look past their nose.
Frankly, I'm glad most people are devoted to doing their jobs, taking care of their families, enjoying their friends, and "waltzing through their lives." They keep the food on the shelves, power in the light sockets, and water running from the tap. But when we have to stop "waltzing" and start scrutinizing the people we hired to run the government, everything slows to a stop. No dances, no tending to our lives, just fuming about the a-holes who don't seem to be doing the job we hired them for.
It’s the people who were appointed who are F-ing up the government. And if the GOP takes over, they will make it easier to fire dedicated federal employees and appoint more extremists. They have long been willing to starve government departments so that they are unable to regulate, and once staffing has been decimated, they argue that the government departments are incompetent and thus should be abolished.
Just discovered your substack and appreciate the directness and clarity of your reporting.
The illegitimate "conservative" majority on SCOTUS contrived by the fascist goons at the Federalist Society have decided that they are the arbiters of science, rather than the actual experts employed by the Administration, when it comes to "interpreting the will of Congress". The simple truth is that nobody in the Judiciary at any level is academically or intellectually qualified to dictate what constitutes a "wetland" and thus WOTUS. Their arrogant presumption is what makes this erroneous ruling such a dangerous precedent - the false pretense that science can be determined in any court of law will inevitably lead us to the abomination that was Lysenkoism.
They are not interpreting science, they are using selective challenges to laws as their way of writing new legislation--legislation that benefits their financial friends.
Point taken, though I would say they are not interpreting science but rather supplanting science with their partisan imaginings.
And yes - lately the Federalist Society has been succeeding at their long game of engineering the Judiciary to "legislate" where conservative minorities in elected legislative roles fail to pass laws favorable to their twisted agenda
Thanks for "Lysenkoism." I love it when I have to look a word up!!!
Yeah I'll never skip an opportunity to tie the current Republican leadership to the utter failures of the Soviet Union and Russia that their MAGA base so admires
Me too, Joanne. Thanks, John!
Same here!
Same, Joanne.
And now we have to use it in a meaningful sentence to show we understand it! Uh oh! I had to look it up again! Apparently, this Lysenko guy was a real villain! https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/12/trofim-lysenko-soviet-union-russia/548786/
But certainly everybody knows those Founder Boys who ordained and established our Constitution - upon which those originalist SCOTUS Boys rely - had the environment upper most in their minds to ensure the people had an enduring living planet for themselves and their posterity...right?
I remember when W was “president,” and many of the scientific pApers related to the environment were redacted, giving no hint to their true conclusions. And I thought W was as low as they could go…
And guess who named Roberts Chief Justice? Yep, the Shrub himself. God, I miss Molly Ivins! 😢
Thanks for your comment, I, too, was glad to discover LFAA awhile back. Had to look up Lysenkosim….learned something new this eve….spot on!
Yet I note that Lysenkoism is in many ways a forerunner for the entire field of epigenetics, one of the most robust discoveries of the late 20th Century. (I'm sure that was completely off topic, but it's fun when what was wrong in science is revealed to be right, but incomplete. Wouldn't it be wonderful if everything were actually true? And everything we thought were lies are actually misinterpretations of the same phenomena?
OK I've had a chance to read many of your other comments on this thread and I suspect that this comment was snark. "Addertongue" indeed
No, he was not in any way the forerunner of epigenetics - Lysenko was simply wrong when he claimed that all inheritance was essentially Lamarckian.
The original sin of Lysenkoism can't be so glibly sanitized by claims he presaged the modern understanding of epigenetics, which is firmly rooted on the existence of genes.
The massive human tragedy that the Soviet system inflicted on the people in the name of Lysenkoism must never be forgotten nor forgiven. For a start read https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/12/trofim-lysenko-soviet-union-russia/548786/ and https://allthatsinteresting.com/trofim-lysenko, and be mindful that Holodomor is still echoing down through history.
I can see why you're a bit exercised over Lysenko, although I think you're conflating the flaws in his research with the deadly force of the Soviet political machine behind him. I don't know what other ideas Lysenco had, but I understnd the basic one is that acquired traits are inheritable, which is why the planaria experiments were so provocative.
That's also the basic understanding of epigenetics, that environmental conditions can trigger genetic changes that persist over generations. If Lysenko had worked for a sane, rational, evidence-based government, the Russians would probably be on the forefront of genetic research, not everybody else.
So, Mr. Kelly, t'was not snark. I was merely limiting my examination to the secientific ideas that were being promoted.
Nevertheless, thank you for finding that Atlantic article, it's an excellent read. I've always known that the adoption of Lysenkoism put Soviet biological research a generation behind -- I never knew the details of the human toll exacted by trying to prove his half-baked scientific theories by brute political force. But to reference a long-ago bill once introduced in the 1897 Indiana legilature, no amount of political will can make pi equal to three.
The article in "allthatsinteresting" is even more brutal in its assessments
No, I'm using Lysenko as an example of how ideology is no substitute for actual science. Lysenko rejected the existence of genes as a bourgeois Western concept. He never conducted a single bit of legitimate research. He believed, a priori, that plants conformed to Communist ideology - that by changing their environment one could change their very nature, permanently. He falsified results of his "experiments" to support this narrative.
Stalin loved that this uneducated peasant, so committed to the principles of the Communist state, was going to elevate their ideology by transforming agriculture. Lysenko's ideological fervor, willingly implemented by Communist dictators, caused ten million Soviets and likely 30 million Chinese to die of starvation.
Our modern understanding of epigenetics rests squarely on the now well-established existence of genes. We (and by "we" I mean people like myself in academia and biotech) don't fully understand the mechanisms of epigenetic persistence yet. But what we do understand so far is that it's the result of changes to the expression of genes rather than changes to the genes themselves, and that it's temporary. We haven't observed permanent changes to the genes that control the expression of other genes. If we ever do, such a result would be an observation of just genetics, not epigenetics.
Wow, great response! All I really knew about Lysenko's methods is the middle school blurb about some planaria experiments in Russia and the idea that learned behaviors can be inherited, a notion cherished by Soviet leaders. Your more detailed treatment puts him more in the category of Andrew Wakefield, but with a ruthless totalitarian regime behind him. And come to think of it, I think Wakefield will probably enjoy a similar relationship wtih the next Republican administration..
But as for environmentally-induced changes to gene expression, didn't the cardioprotective benefits of famine survival in Sweden historical studies persist over several generations? Is that what you mean by temporary? (And btw, what do you do for academia and biotech? I'm just a perpetual student down at the University, admiring the pretty baubles on the lab tables!)
Welcome aboard, and thanks for sending me to the dictionary.
Sooooo. When the next hurricane hits these red states where wet land destruction will accelerate thanks to the SCROTUS, do the rest of us have to pitch in (again) so they can rebuild? Asking for a friend.
Exactly, always. But if a blue state suffers, help will be rejected by all the brawlers, with nary a whiff of shame
Naw, we'll get brooms to sweep our forest floors.
And paper towels . . .
Yes, indeed, Sky. That's the way it works! /s
HOW the heck do these "people" like McCarthy have any self-respect in making these kinds of statements, and supporting TFG!!!????? They are no better than as stated by Judge Mehta, “You, sir, present an ongoing threat and a peril to this country and to the republic and to the very fabric of this democracy.”
And then there's SCOTUS, gutting our environmental protections. SMH.
Dr. Heather, you sure know how to swing a quote like a mallet and close your LFAAs with impact.
"Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung said in a statement: “This is nothing more than a targeted, politically motivated witch hunt against President Trump that is concocted to meddle in an election and prevent the American people from returning him to the White House.”"
We The People are definitely going to prevent dump from getting anywhere NEAR the White House again. Thank you, Heather. I was thrilled that Rocky Rhodes is going to do very long hard time and then have three more years of being kept under surveillance. This is good news for us. It gives me hope TFG will also be doing time. Maybe they can be cell mates.
The undoing of EPA water protections sent my mood right back down to miserable. I just don’t know what these IDIOTS are thinking, oh, right they DON’T THINK about anything. OMG.
McCarthy is only slightly smarter than Louie Gohmert, and has frequently made statements that show that he can be even dumber than the Dumbest Member Of Congress. Trying to point to Biden as responsible for EPA wetland regulations 50 years in the making is an example of this. McCarthy is feckless, and I'm embarrassed that the idiots in Bakersfield that keep sending him back to the House call themselves "Californians".
Bakersfield is really a transplanted piece of Oklahoma. As a Californian, McCarthy makes my skin crawl. Such a tumor and dumber than dirt.
I have no love for Oklahoma, but I'll give them this - their farmers are mostly smart enough to realize that it's dumb AF to try to farm cotton in a desert - something the Bakersfieldians are too dumb to figure out. McCarthy was born and raised there - better EPA regs might have prevented the brain damage he's clearly suffered.
To be clear, my point wasn't that Oklahomans are dumb, and certainly farmers aren't! But the regressive conservatism is NOT California today. Bakersfield never progressed like most of the rest of the state - it's firmly mired in the unenlightened past.
Not just blaming Biden for EPA regulations, but for this case, which was set in motion under W's EPA. I long for the days when people were ashamed to blatantly lie. I also long for the days when people were ashamed to be blatantly racist, homophobic and misogynistic.
When in hell was that, Jeanne? I knew people like that, but there have always been people who openly lied, people who were openly racist, homophobic and misogynistic, and got away with it because nobody called them out. At least now we are calling them out. And I still think we're going to win, because if they weren't worried about it, they wouldn't be putting so much effort into pretending they aren't doing what they are doing. Plus, the unrepentant ones are looking like what they are: unrepentant fools.
Admittedly I was thinking of a single situation, back in 2012 when Missouri Rep Todd Akin was running for Senate and made the stupid comment about "legitimate" rape victims, the Republican party, the ticket led by Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, abandoned him. Maybe it was an isolated incident but it struck me that there was a time the Republican Party held despicable people accountable....
I remember that incident: Akin's comment floored me. You are right about the Republican Party turning their back on him. But they never turned their back on Newt Gingrich after it came out that he had been having a full-blown long-time affair at the same time he was digging at Bill Clinton. They were right there behind him. That period was when I knew the Republican party was lost. They only turned their backs on disposable people. At the same time, I still knew decent conservative Republicans, and respected them. They were the ballast. I know many who struggle with their identity as Republicans, and are as disgusted as we are.
McCarthy reminds me of "Slippin' Jimmy" from Better Call Saul.
Please, NO! Jimmy had charm and a good heart, even though he misbehaved. McCarthy has NO good qualities: he's just a corrupt, hungry-for-power, narcissist! He'd do anything to get what he wants, the country be damned!
"HOW the heck do these "people" like McCarthy have any self-respect in making these kinds of statements, and supporting TFG!!!?????"
Not a trace.
"as stated by Judge Mehta, 'You, sir, present an ongoing threat and a peril to this country and to the republic and to the very fabric of this democracy' .”
Ah. There's an adult in the room.
Their high level of self-respect is based on their belief in the gospel of T.
Why do I feel nauseated?
The pervasive stench of corruption?
Yes, that's probably it.
SCOTUS is stupid, uninformed, arrogant and dangerous. The EPA of Nixon regulatory approach to wetlands makes perfect sense to this farmer, and www.lewisfamilyfarm.com has protected wetlands where possible. We also created a huge pond to offer water birds a home and fish, turtles, muskrat and others habitat. We have protected the smallest living organisms, thus protecting the base of life itself and food for wildlife. Wetlands host the smallest living creatures, many invisible. Birds need mosquitoes. SC0TUS is all wet on this one.
President Richard M. Nixon’s fouled record’s one bright spot was EPA. That’s it.
Thanks for all you do for the environment Sandy!
Bless you, MaryPat!
Evidently the right-wing SCOTUS justices and their donor/backers have their own sources of clean water and don't have to drink the same water the rest of us do. It is jaw-dropping to watch the justices dismantle our country, law by law. What will they go after next?
Dismantle the country, law by law, Bill Moyers railed against this decades ago…. Who listened??
(me)
They don’t have to drink the same water, but a few generations in the future, their great grandchildren, will have to find a new planet, uninhabited and unpolluted by repubs.
In a word, SCOTUS SCUM is fucking crazy.
Evening to All,
I write tonight in an attempt to provide what I hope is a slightly deeper perspective on the Sackett decision by the Supremes today.
While I wholeheartedly join in the overall tenor of dismay and umbrage at the fact that this Court has now taken a second significant step to disembowel the letter and spirit of the major pieces of legislation that created and empowered the EPA within less than a year's time, I also feel that there is a development within the Sackett opinion that is worth noting.
Please know that every Supreme Court decision has both a holding or judgment, and a decision or opinion. The former is basically who won and who lost, or some combination of same, and the latter is the why and wherefore. The "why and wherefore" of course, contains the final legal interpretation of the particular law/statute in question and the factual pattern presented therewith.
I have not read the entirety of the Sackett decision, so my thoughts here are certainly incomplete. From my cursory glance however, I see that it is yet another terrible decision emasculating the powers of the EPA in a manner aligned at least somewhat with the long running extreme conservative anti-regulatory, defang the "administrative state" school of thought. Yet, that same glance tells me it isn't quite as bad as the earlier EPA v. West Virginia decision.
In the latter decision, delivered as part of the terrible trio of decisions in the final week of the Court's term last year (Dobbs and Bruen being the others), Chief Justice Roberts dove deeply into sophistry, as he parsed the congressionally delegated EPA authority (Heather's exposition of this in tonight's letter is spot on) so finely as to render it meaningless as an executive department.
In contrast, the Sackett decision was not written by the Chief Justice but by one of the two cranky radical revanchists on the Court, Sullen Sam Alito. (No Clearance Clarence/Corrupt Crony of Crow Clarence, being the other)
More importantly, none other than Squee's pal, Justice Brett Kavanaugh concurred in the judgment but not in Justice Alito's lead opinion. This is important considering that this was a 5-4 decision.
In fact, ALL NINE JUSTICES agreed that the Sacketts were wronged by the EPA's interpretation of the Clean Water Act to their attempt to build their home. In other words, there was no disagreement among the nine Justices that the EPA overreached when attempting to stop this particular couple from building this particular house, on this particular parcel of land in Idaho.
Justice Kavanaugh seems to have articulated a kinder, gentler version of Justice Kagan's angry dissent respecting the Court's brazen tossing over of the clear language in the Clean Water Act empowering the EPA to regulate wetlands "adjacent" to waters covered by the Act. Alito's opinion injected a hitherto unknown "continuing surface connection" test to limit the long understood definition of wetlands covered by the Act. Kavanaugh took exception to that and said so. Basically, he said that the term "adjacent" within the Act has never been interpreted to mean "adjoining", because those two terms have wholly different meanings. He is correct.
I find some small comfort in this, because it appears that Justice "I like beer, how about you, Senator?!", has thrown down the gauntlet before his fellow Trumpian appointees, calling them out on their absurdity uber analysis here. Further, as there will certainly be significant litigation stemming from this opinion, Justice Kavanaugh may stand as a surprising bulwark to maintain at least a bit of sanity in environmental jurisprudence and resulting policy.
We are totally screwed if we depend on Kavanaugh for, well, anything
EXACTLY!!!
Still, we're all down stream, aren't we? Frat-boy Justice sans pretzel-analysis aside, this decision will make it MUCH easier and faster for us to shit in our own drinking water.
Maybe. Maybe not. My point was that a bad decision like thus, bybthe slimmest of majorities might not stand under its own weight
Thanks for the clarification. I fear adjacent more than adjoining.
I hope you are right, that the Court is still a deliberative body that is actually aware of the effect of their rulings. Sometime is seems like they are willing to live in the world of their abslutist fantasies until the flood waters actually reach their own personal doorsteps. Sort of like Thomas decrying same-sex marriage while ignoring the fact that his interracial marriage is allowed under the very same legal reasoning.
If you want to see just how far out of touch Alito's opinion in Sackett is, read "Wetlands: Characteristics and Boundaries" published by the National Academy of Sciences in 1995. NAS commissioned a task force in 1993 to bring together scientific consensus for policymakers to use to define jurisdictional wetlands. They also review the history of legislation leading to the Clean Water Act and jurisprudence relating to wetland regulation following its passage. The book is available for free download here: https://nap.nationalacademies.org/download/4766
Notably there's zero mention of this seminal work in the Sackett decision, even in passing. Today's Republicans ignore any science that doesn't comport with their ideology. SCOTUS did the same thing in Dobbs and in EPA v. WVa
Wow! Thanks for that, John. I'll check out the NAS book. This is outrageous, yet given the recent history of this Court, not surprising. Needless to say, it didn't use to be this way. If I remember correctly, Justice Stevens' opinion in Rapanos reflected some serious research, as is expected for this area of jurisprudence
Maybe. Don’t hold your breath.
Daniel Streeter, Jr., you get it. Impeachment is impossible. What’s next?
As has been pointed out by numerous observers today, Traitor Trump is now no longer just on the hook for obstruction of justice by keeping the documents, but is now liable for prosecution under the Espionage Act for hiding the documents, and for "dissemination" for letting anyone not authorized to see them.
The Orcs masquerading as human beings in the House Republicans need to be seen as the traitors they are ("declaring war on the United States") and dealt with as such.
A good day, these days, when a key insurrectionist/traitor gets a well-deserved sentence and #DeSaster is trending on Twitter. It couldn't be more perfect and hopefully will hasten that fascist's political demise.
The wetlands rulings though - it makes me weep. And rage. An illegitimate court, with two credibly accused predators and a majority of zealots, is actively destroying the country.
The wetlands ruling really bothers me. As if you cannot see the damage that has been done by allowing unfettered building/development/pollution of our wetlands. Another commenter noted the decay of the Everglades from the demand for green lawns and cruise ship access.
My little corner of the world (the southwest side of Eugene in the Willamette Valley) has a very intricate and (now) protected area of wetlands within the Willamette River system (the wetlands west of my house feed into Amazon slough which feeds into the Long Tom River which joins the Willamette just north of Eugene.
At the end of every "Letters from an American" I wish HCR would add one reminder.
"Election winners make the laws, the punishments, and shape the judiciary. Work and help to elect Democrats."
But not just any Democrats. They must be authentic Democrats and not DINOs.
Sorry, Ms. Gilbert, but you sent a chill down my spine when you refered to "authentic" Democrats, because I am very confident that while our opinions differ on a great many topics, we are both still Democrats, and I will never accuse you of being a "DINO" or some other derogatory name just because we disagree. Those are Republican tactics that have led them into the right-wing cesspit they are now floundering in. We work together, differences and all.
Maybe Joanne meant don’t elect a “Democrat” who, upon election, turns Republican or independent? It’s happened lately!
Too true -- didn't the defection of a N. Carolina Democrat help the Repubs override a Governor's veto of an abortion ban? And Sen. Sinema deserves her own comment thread. Nevertheless, we must not let the actions of individuals turn our "fringe" against our "middle."
With the G.O.P. narrowing their belief system down to "Whatever Trump Says!, the Democratic Party is having to cover a huge amount of ideological territory in order to maintain a two-party system. At what other time in our history would Bernie Frank, A.O.C, , Joe Biden, and Joe Manchin ever be on the same political side? In its own way, it's as absurd as the Koch Brothers climbing into bed with the Q-Anon nuts and the dirt-scratcher Evangelicals. But somehow, the current power dynamic requires it.
Heather, thank you for enumerating the amount of potential wetlands loss caused by the SCOTUS’ ruling. When the paved wetlands allow even more destruction by hurricanes, just watch the Supremes that allowed it disavow having any inkling that their ruling could cause the catastrophe.
Something not getting nearly enough attention is Ron Desantis considering pardoning TFG if he’s elected. This could leave supporters of TFG with a dilemma: vote for a president that might be serving from jail or vote for a TFG-lite who might pardon TFG.
Mary! As to your first paragraph, I of course thought of Joni Mitchell: "I wrote 'Big Yellow Taxi' on my first trip to Hawaii. I took a taxi to the hotel and when I woke up the next morning, I threw back the curtains and saw these beautiful green mountains in the distance. Then, I looked down and there was a parking lot as far as the eye could see, and it broke my heart […] this blight on paradise. That's when I sat down and wrote the song." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2595abcvh2M
As to your second paragraph, Yikes! But maybe Dems should make this a campaign slogan: "A vote for DeSantis is a vote to pardon Trump!"
I didn't know that, Lynell! Thanks!