Compare Dobbs and the Trump immunity case? Constitution must begin in the 'text.' Dobbs: The text says nothing about abortion, so the right does not exist. Trump: the text says nothing about immunity, but we will find it there.

As with the three-hour argument in Trump v. Anderson, a disconcertingly precious little of the two-hour argument today was even devoted to the specific and only question presented for decision.

The parade of horribles involving hypothetical future Presidents facing vindictive prosecutions is maddening given that an actual past and possibly future real President abusing his office in an attempt to stage a coup.

Another fascinating DW-NOMINATE factoid:

These canonical legislator ideology scores rely for identification on starting values that Poole and Roosenthal created in the 1980s by making videotapes of legislator positions given different fits.

Still used as far as I can tell... 👀

donors in each major party are substantially more likely to prioritize Supreme Court nominations than their general public co-partisans are, with Republican donors especially likely to do so
jkastellec.scholar.princeton.edu/sites/g/files/…

not sure I've ever seen a single tweet capture so many of the pathologies of American liberalism, incredible feat

Nicholas Grossman @StevenStrauss Except justices don't retire like that. They retire *subject to* confirmation of a replacement. And, FUN FACT: Until a justice actually retires, she can withdraw her plan to retire. Iow, if no Biden nominee were confirmed and Trump were elected, Sotomayor could stay on the Court.

The art of social science is combining the right analysis and evidence (method) with the right substantive question.

It should not be thought of as a frontier where you trade off empirical rigour against substantive import.

Honestly takes a lot for me to ever side with the credibility revolutionaries, but the do-good-work-that’s-important-not-bad-work-that-isn’t “advice”somehow has me here.

Neal Katyal when it's time to defend the worst causes ever:

NYers also trying to take credit. It was a Jersey quake

That was much stronger than the 2011 east coast earthquake.

Yup.

washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/…

twitter.com/hjessy_/status…

NEW: Top Democrats won’t join calls for Sotomayor to retire.

But in interviews with NBC, they’re voicing fears of a RBG redux.

“We should learn a lesson. And it’s not like there’s any mystery here about what the lesson should be.”

w/ Lawrence Hurley:

nbcnews.com/politics/supre…

In the sense that AI is really good at just making things up, yes.

Nearly any identification strategy regression equation can be turned into a graph using *raw* data. Dif-in-dif: raw trends. IV: plots of outcome against instrument. Fixed effects: that's an axis or graph split. I force myself to always make the graph. If referee, demand the graph

You know that scene in Succession where Tom Wambsgans explains to Kendall that his loyalty to Logan Roy is entirely based on never having seen Logan get fucked?

I think about that scene quite a bit when I watch our appellate courts function.

The Ivy League is now 8-12 in the tourney since 2010, playing every game against teams ranked seven or more seed lines higher. Two wins each by Yale, Princeton, Cornell, Harvard.

I was reviewing the Clinton-Meirowitz papers on incorporating agenda information to improve roll call-based estimates---'The Room Where it Happens' was just sitting there for the title to this working paper.

Unless I'm interrupted by a call, I am going to take the time to live-tweet the SB4 stay argument this morning at CA5 at 10 am.

For those new to CA5 and its characters: the panel is Chief Judge Richman, Judge Andrew Oldham, and Judge Irma Ramirez, the newest judge. 1/