I'm going to treat you with good faith and assume you were using "cool man" in the same way someone might say "that's just like your opinion man", as a saying, but I will remind you that this person has their pronouns in their display name and you need to respect them.
I can't imagine who possibly lobbied for this and why it's focused only on artists and journalists
I'm not sure why there's the need to rebrand confidence to the term dominance, but I generally agree with the author. With that being said, I'm not sure I fully understand what dominance means or where the data comes from. It feels like there might be some cherry-picking here, because upon reflection I think even many centrist dems do draw hard lines in the sand on certain issues. In general I agree with the praise for MLK and for being more uncompromising on the issues that matter, and I also agree strongly with how important a positive uplifting message (It's how AOC and many of the true progressives got elected) is and how very few democrats actually execute on this.
In the future please put articles like this in politics.
The entire dissent was a solid read, if you're into that kind of stuff. Just another little choice quote which made me chuckle:
In sum, the majority today endorses an expansive vision of Presidential immunity that was never recognized by the Founders, any sitting President, the Executive Branch, or even President Trump’s lawyers, until now. Settled under- standings of the Constitution are of little use to the majority in this case, and so it ignores them
Fantastic points, and I think that's touched upon when the author talks about 'brokenness' towards the end. There's systems that don't work, and it's not just issues of regulation that are needed to fix it. Much like progressives in the early 1900s had to radically rethink entire systems (new deal) we need similar ideas today to fix problems which are multifaceted and difficult. Affordable housing is infrastructure, unaffordable housing is not.
To be fair, congress could pass a law that explicitly states what the old Chevron decision did, that these agencies have power to set standards. That wouldn't solve the broken court which should have been packed as soon as Biden took office but it would at least explicitly stop the federalist anti regulatory stance as it would be in the word of law.
any president can
oh nooo a warning whatever will they do
you can pack the court at anytime Joe, how about now
Locking comments, this has gone off the rails and devolved into hurling insults
The author touches on this near the beginning-
So they're treating them like archives and extracting them