I had exactly that thought. “I wonder how this one slipped through.” No doubt a pardon or commutation is in his future.
The Supreme Court declines to hear Trump’s appeal of the first E. Jean Carroll civil case.
Ha ha.
https://meidasnews.com/news/supreme-court-declines-to-hear-trumps-appeal-in-e-jean-carroll-case
To add to the above schadenfreude, SCOTUS has rejected his argument against counting mail-in ballots that are postmarked by election day but received later:
The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that states can count ballots that arrive after Election Day, a persistent target of President Donald Trump.
The 5-4 decision rejected a Republican-led attack on laws in more than half the states and the District of Columbia that permit mailed ballots to arrive and be counted some number of days after the election, provided they are postmarked by Election Day. The outcome spares officials the headache of changing their ballot rules just a few months before the 2026 midterm congressional elections.
--------------------------------------------At issue was whether federal law sets a single Election Day that requires ballots to be both cast by voters and received by state officials.
If SCOTUS had sided with the Orange Peril in this, I have little doubt that the next step would have been to use the decision as justification for an Executive Order implementing that last paragraph: in person only, voting only on Election Day, no ballots counted after midnight, &c&c&c (to the extent that he needs justification, which is not at all). As it is, put the ketchup kleanup krew on high alert.
I’m relieved to hear that, because it would have directly impacted our elections here in Washington.
(I always vote early so it wouldn’t have impacted my vote personally, but still.)
Honestly the whole postmarked by but received after election day thing is nullified by dropping your ballot in the mail well before election day.* What worries me more are the attempts to limit ‘valid’ votes as only those in person on election day itself.
*Recognizing that you shouldn’t be forced by the federal government to do anything more than your state’s voting requirements. It’s conservative hypocrisy at it’s finest. “We want state’s rights unless the state is doing something we don’t like in which we want the otherwise e-e-e-vil Federal government to step in.”
I think that’s going to be a much harder sell though. Yeah, I can see that as being on the priority list for the people trying to suppress votes, but at least the rule about having to be received by election day has the slightest whiff of legitimacy to it. There is absolutely no rational argument for requiring people to vote in-person in the modern day except “the other side votes more that way and we don’t want them voting”.
Not necessarily. The Post Office could go “hey, this looks like a ballot… whoops! Where did it go?” SCOTUS has already decided that the Post Office cannot be held responsible for undelivered mail. The best bet is to actually drop it off in person.
Some of the staff that got fired by DOGE at the NOAA have launched their own climate awareness website, which essentially replaces the weakened government site climate.gov.
Built by former members of the team behind the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s popular Climate.gov website, Climate.us will keep climate information accurate, accessible, scientifically rigorous, and useful for the people who rely on it, including educators, students, journalists, scientists, community leaders, local and state decision-makers, and members of the public.
I saw a story about this yesterday. I love those people. True patriots.
Patriots? I would not limit their service to the USA, a lot of people around the world need and rely on those data. I’d rather call them cosmopolitans, or philantropists in the positive sense of the world (not like the billionaires giving to their pet vanity projects) or simply decent people.
Bookmarked!
That’s a good and astute observation. They are. Thanks for pointing it out!
Which is what I do as well. My assumption was that you had to use the PO, being overseas or college or something.
thank you for posting that!
That’s great. To people in science at least, facts matter.
Hear, hear! Reminds me of this similarly cool and public-spirited site: https://ourparks.org/
This one’s more of a “poetic justice” story.
Little background:
During the ongoing FIFA World Cup, a player for the United States was suspended for a game after receiving a “red card” (given for a rule violation or other infraction), which would have rendered him ineligible to play for the USA in the next game.
Trump stepped in and had the suspension delayed, as the player is one of the best on the team, and it would diminish the USA’s chances of winning.
The ironic part is that the player is only eligible to be on the team because of birthright citizenship. Folarin Balogun was born in New York while his parents were visiting the country while vacationing.
Given Trump’s recent efforts to end birthright citizenship, the hypocrisy is astounding.
Anyway, Balogan was eligible to play in the tournament because of Trump’s interference.
The US team lost their next game, knocking them out of the tournament.
The team that beat them, Belgium, celebrated the win by performing Trump’s signature “YMCA” dance.
I’ve been avoiding World Cup matches for the most part, because fuck FIFA and their blatant corruption and sucking up to Trump. But my wife and I were able to catch the last part of the match between USA and Belgium, and we were wholeheartedly rooting for Belgium.
It was delicious watching the USA down 3-1, desperately trying to score in the last few minutes, but instead giving up another score, and losing 4-1. It was like another “fuck you” to Trump and his cheating.
Is “pulling the goalie” a common thing in soccer at the end of games when you are behind? I’ve seen it fairly often in hockey where it’s, “yeah, this probably means they’re going to score even more on us, but it also makes it slightly more likely that we’re going to score and maybe we’ll get lucky”.
It almost never happens, because while in hockey the goal is relatively small it’s still somewhat difficult to get a goal as long as there are defenders around, and it’s a risk that can pay off. In soccer, the goal is so large and the field so wide that if you have no goalie and an opponent goes down the field, a goal is trivial to score. Also, the rules about substitutions in soccer are different; you only get 3 per match, and wasting one on pulling your goalie can really screw you over later. It does happen but it’s very, very rare in soccer.