Today’s Lineup
The power of holding grudges against the United States Supreme Court, learning more about Leonard Leo, the New York Times ignores an important story, emphasizing how abortion ban exceptions are fake, examining wrongful convictions and police shootings, a member of the Exonerated Five wins a Democratic primary for New York City Council, an amazing profile of Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova, Megan Rapinoe’s impact, and preparing for the 2023 Women’s World Cup.
#1
The importance of staying angry at the Supreme Court (Ian Millhiser, Vox)
“It’s disturbing that two of the nine justices, who collectively have the final word on how to read the First Amendment, would even suggest that they should not be criticized. But it is not particularly surprising. Federal judges, who are not elected, must draw their legitimacy from the public perception that they are obedient to a legal text. Criticisms like the Kagan dissent Roberts responded so sharply to can refute that perception, and feed the rapidly growing disapproval of the Court.
Similarly, disparagement of the justices and their decisions is one of the most powerful weapons ordinary Americans can wield against the nation’s nine justices. Indeed, if there is one lesson to be drawn from this Court’s recently completed term, it is to never underestimate the power of holding a grudge against the Supreme Court.”
WHY I FIND IT INTERESTING:
While the Supreme Court pleasantly surprised liberals with rulings prohibiting racial gerrymandering and preserving some of the Voting Rights Act’s results doctrine, Millhiser argues that we must not let these outlier decisions overshadow the damage the Court did. He explains how conservative grudges against Warren Court decisions fed the activists and donors who created a judge pipeline with the Federalist Society and doctrines like the made-up Major Questions Doctrine. It took decades of work, some luck, and extra-constitutional actions by the Senate to create this 6-3 conservative supermajority. We should remain angry about this Court’s decisions to reverse women’s right to reproductive health care, block the Biden student loan debt relief program, and create a new right for businesses to discriminate against the LGBTQ community. I also want to highlight the horrific decision in Jones v. Hendrix that will prevent people with credible claims of being legally innocent from having the ability to challenge their convictions. Justice Clarence Thomas’ 6-3 opinion will keep innocent people in prison under a technicality. This is cruel. I hope we hold grudges against these decisions long enough to win elections, reform the Court, and restore these rights.
Things I Find Interesting is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
#2
Leonard Leo: Man in the Middle: Part I and Part II (Greg Olear, Prevail)
From Part I
“Occupying the center of an intricate web of political, legal, religious, and business connections, Leonard Leo is the quintessential Man in the Middle, a veritable dark-money spider. Like a spider, he is patient, painstaking, relentless, and much more powerful that he appears. And like a spider, he prefers to stay hidden.”
…
From Part II
“As many legal scholars have pointed out, the internal logic of the Leonard Leo Court is functionally nonexistent. Nothing holds. It’s like you’re halfway through Succession, one of the White Walkers from Game of Thrones shows up, and Kendall Roy starts shooting lasers from his eyes. There is no rhyme or reason to these decisions. The Leonard Leo judges will dredge up some anti-witchcraft statute from medieval England, while ignoring the last 50 years of settled law in the here and now; “Starry Decisis” may as well be Sam Alito’s drag name. Automatic weapons have more rights than women. Corporations have more rights than gays and Lesbians. And Leonard Leo and his moneyed chums have more rights than anyone.”
WHY I FIND IT INTERESTING:
One of the easiest ways to predict how the Supreme Court will decide a case is to figure out what outcome conservative legal activist Leonard Leo would want. In these two posts, Greg Olear explains Leo’s connections to Supreme Court Justices, federal judges, Federalist Society lawyers, media members, billionaire donors, politicians, and radical Catholic activists. It is an extensive network, and Leo has the opportunity to build upon it as he begins to distribute the proceeds from a more than one billion dollar political donation he recently received. Understanding Leo and his web of connections is essential to figuring out how we got here and what may be necessary to change course. I also recommend this episode of the Strict Scrutiny podcast featuring a conversation with Amanda Hollis-Brusky, who is the author of Ideas with Consequences: The Federalist Society and the Conservative Counterrevolution and Separate But Faithful: The Christian Right’s Radical Struggle to Transform Law & Legal Culture. Leo is an important political figure. He shouldn’t be able to hide in the shadows.
#3
Donald Trump inspired a man to go to Barack Obama’s house with guns and explosives. The New York Times ignored it. (Jamison Foser, Finding Gravity)
“And so the New York Times has never told its readers, among other things, that Taranto was apparently inspired by Trump — remember, Trump’s name never appeared in the June 30 article. The Times has never told its readers that Taranto went to Obama’s home after he saw a social media post from Trump containing Obama’s address — an obvious attempt to incite just such an action.
This is just the latest in a long line of examples of the Times downplaying Donald Trump’s years-long efforts to encourage his supporters to commit acts of political violence against his opponents. There are few more important ongoing stories in America than the former president and current presidential candidate using violence and the threat of violence as a means of regaining power. Yet the New York Times — a newspaper that published multiple pieces about Alan Dershowitz not getting invited to parties — clearly does not take this seriously. Does not give it the relentless, ongoing coverage it deserves.”
WHY I FIND IT INTERESTING:
How is former President Donald Trump’s involvement in this story not a development worthy of coverage in the “paper of record?” As Foser explains, the New York Times story about Taranto’s arrest does not mention Trump and the paper has not published another story about the case. Thankfully CBS News and the Associated Press have noted the connection between Trump’s social media activity and Taranto’s activities. As the Associated Press story explains, “On the day of his June 29 arrest, prosecutors said, Taranto reposted a Truth Social post from Trump containing what Trump claimed was Obama’s home address. In a post on Telegram, Taranto wrote: “We got these losers surrounded! See you in hell, Podesta’s and Obama’s.” That’s a reference to John Podesta, the former chair of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Democratic presidential campaign.” Over the past few days, I have had several conversations with people who closely follow politics and yet were unaware of the Trump post in connection to this dangerous situation. But I can’t be surprised, given how little attention the New York Times has paid to the situation. I cannot fathom how this story isn’t worthy of more coverage.
#4
Abortion Exceptions Don’t Exist (Jessica Valenti, Abortion Every Day)
“The only thing that Americans want more than broad access to abortion is access to abortion for sexual violence victims and those whose health and lives are in danger. The polling is downright astronomical—even in red states, even among Republicans. And so it makes sense that conservatives would focus on exceptions; they desperately need an abortion stance that’s popular.
Best of all for the GOP, exceptions aren’t real. They’re deliberately designed to be unusable. So when Republicans announce their support for so-called exceptions—loudly proclaiming that they’re willing to meet in the middle—they’re presenting a compromise that doesn’t actually exist. For them, it’s a win-win.
Inexplicably, Democrats have spent little time pointing out that exceptions aren’t real—even though they have all the proof they need.
Since Roe was overturned, horror story after horror story has come out of states with ‘exceptions’ to their bans. A woman in Texas going septic, a Missouri woman with a doomed and deadly pregnancy, a 10 year-old rape victim in Ohio. All lived in states where their circumstances should have qualified them for abortions, yet none were able to access care. One woman in Louisiana even had a fetus with a fatal condition that was specifically listed in the state’s exceptions, yet had to leave her home state for an abortion.”
WHY I FIND IT INTERESTING:
Jessica Valenti continues her essential work describing what is happening across the country in Abortion, Every Day. It is crucial for people to understand the truth behind the talk about the so-called exceptions to the unpopular abortion bans that Republicans have been enacting in states they control. I share Valenti’s frustration that Democratic elected officials have not done more to explain why this “exceptions” debate is so misleading. As many doctors have explained, pregnancy is too complicated to legislate. That’s why women and their physicians should make these decisions. Making that possible nationwide will require explaining how these laws work and how they impact pregnant people needing medical care.
Thank you for reading Things I Find Interesting. This post is public so feel free to share it.
#5
Religious right gets blindsided by angry parents in a Southern California school district (Blake Jones, Politico)
“Three Southern California school board members backed by a far-right pastor narrowly won election last fall in campaigns fueled by pandemic rage.
Then they banned critical race theory and rejected social studies materials that included LGBTQ rights hero Harvey Milk.
Now, they’re fighting for their political lives.
After just six months in office, those officials face a recall effort on top of a civil rights investigation launched by the state’s Democratic-led education department. Students have held protests, and irate parents and teachers are swarming the board’s meetings, feeling that their town — the fast-growing, politically diverse suburb of Temecula in Riverside County — has become consumed by partisan warfare.”
WHY I FIND IT INTERESTING:
Those students are correct. This right-wing school board also has fired its popular superintendent and now faces the prospect of the state securing textbooks that meet the state’s instructional standards. The chaotic situation in Temecula demonstrates why it is vital for community members to pay attention to down-ballot races. We know right-wing activists are focused on them. As the Associated Press’ Ali Swenson explained after attending the recent Moms for Liberty Convention: “…Moms for Liberty, which has spent its first two years inflaming school board meetings with aggressive complaints about instruction on systemic racism and gender identity in the classroom, is developing a larger strategy to overhaul education infrastructure across the country.” This dynamic will be one of the biggest stories of the 2024 elections—and not just in red states and communities. These are also the kinds of elections Republicans can win in blue states. And it makes sense for Republicans here to focus on these down-ballot elections in California since the GOP has failed to win a statewide office here since Arnold Schwarzenegger was re-elected as governor and Steve Poizner was elected insurance commissioner in November 2006.
#6
What if we treated wrongful convictions and bad police shootings the way we treat plane crashes? (Radley Balko, The Watch)
“When the criminal justice system goes terribly wrong, it’s rarely the fault of a single bad actor. A wrongly conviction typically includes errors or malfeasance by police, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and the courts, not to mention possible contributions from crime lab analysts and other expert witnesses. Even a bad shooting by a single police officer are usually the product of institutional failure. Was the officer trained properly? What was the officer’s personnel history? Should the officer have been fired for previous misconduct? Does the police department use an early warning system to flag potentially abusive or trigger-happy officers? If not, why not? If so, why wasn’t that officer flagged?
A sentinel event review, or SER, is an attempt to dig into and correct these institutional failures. The idea is to bring in all the relevant parties to get at the root of what caused an outcome that everyone agrees is unacceptable.
The inspiration for the idea comes from two fields outside of criminal justice: the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigations of plane and train crashes, and the morbidity and mortality (M&M) reports hospitals conduct after medical errors, such as amputating the wrong limb or administering the wrong medication.”
WHY I FIND IT INTERESTING:
Balko, an investigative journalist and author of Rise of the Warrior Cop, shares this conversation with Quattrone Center Executive Director John Hollway about what can be done to get the criminal justice system to embrace these kinds of reviews. We know how they can help correct systemic problems and allow for greater transparency in other high-pressure situations. I think our criminal justice system would benefit for wider adoption of this model.
#7
Going from prison to politics with Yusef Salaam: podcast and transcript (MSNBC’s Why Is This Happening? with Chris Hayes)
Yusef Salaam was just 15 years old in 1989 when he, along with four other Black and Latino teenagers, were wrongly accused of the brutal rape and assault of a 28-year-old white woman who was jogging in Central Park. Salaam was convicted at 16 and was incarcerated for seven years. The group, known as the Central Park Five, maintained their innocence and they were exonerated in 2002 only after a convicted murderer and serial rapist confessed to the crimes. Salaam, who has since become known as one of the Exonerated Central Park Five, has turned his pain into purpose as an activist, criminal justice reform advocate and motivational speaker. He is the author of “Better, Not Bitter: Living on Purpose in the Pursuit of Racial Justice” and his story has been told in numerous films and books. Salaam, who is now 49, launched a political campaign earlier this year and recently won the Democratic primary for a New York City Council seat in Harlem. He joins WITHpod to discuss his trajectory, being “run over by the spike wheels of justice,” and why he got involved in politics.
WHY I FIND IT INTERESTING:
This podcast features an informative conversation between MSNBC Host Chris Hayes and Exonerated Five member Yusef Salaam. Salaam just won an upset victory for a Democratic nomination for a seat on the New York City Council. Hayes asks about Salaam’s childhood, the wrongful conviction, and why he decided to seek political office. And as Politico’s Janaki Chadha explains, Salaam’s primary victory over two well-known politicians also represents a shift in political power in Harlem.
#8
Bitter rivals. Beloved friends. Survivors. After 50 years, Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova understand each other like no one else can. When cancer came, they knew where to turn. (Sally Jenkins, The Washington Post)
They have known each other for 50 years now, outlasting most marriages. Aside from blood kin, Navratilova points out, “I’ve known Chris longer than anybody else in my life, and so it is for her.” Lately, they have never been closer — a fact they refuse to cheapen with sentimentality. “It’s been up and down, the friendship,” Evert says. At the ages of 68 and 66, respectively, Evert and Navratilova have found themselves more intertwined than ever, by an unwelcome factor. You want to meet an opponent who draws you nearer in mutual understanding? Try having cancer at the same time.
“It was like, are you kidding me?” Evert says.
WHY I FIND IT INTERESTING:
This profile by Sally Jenkins is one of the best articles I’ve read this year. It shares a remarkable story about two of the best athletes of the 20th Century. Jenkins describes their rivalry—they met in 60 final matches and each won 18 major titles—and how it got in the way of their friendship until after they retired. We also learn how they supported each other when facing their recent cancer diagnoses. They share a remarkable history, and Jenkins was absolutely the right person to put all of it into context.
#9
The Megan Rapinoe Era Only Ends When We Stop Fighting Back (Dave Zirin, The Nation)
Megan Rapinoe, the most important US soccer player of the last 20 years, is retiring. The 38-year-old with a goal-scoring flair as striking as her kaleidoscopic coif announced that she will be saying goodbye after the 2023 World Cup. In telling the world now, Rapinoe has created the possibility of a dramatic sendoff, driving even more interest in what will be a rollicking tournament.
Rapinoe’s two-decade career is nearly peerless. Her 199 career games with the US national team, her 63 international goals—many of them scored in unbearably tense moments—will be remembered for as long as people take the pitch. Her 2019 was particularly epic. That year, she won the Ballon d’Or as the FIFA women’s player of the year, scored six goals at the World Cup, and won the Golden Boot as the tournament’s top scorer and the Golden Ball for top player.
But Rapinoe became widely known as far more than a soccer player in 2016 when she became the first white athlete to take a knee during the national anthem in solidarity with the protests against racism and police violence staged by Colin Kaepernick.
WHY I FIND IT INTERESTING:
Dave Zirin did an outstanding job of revisiting interviews he has done with Rapinoe over the years to describe the impact she had on women’s soccer as a player and on our nation as an activist. She has been at the forefront of conversations about LGBTQ rights, anti-racism, trans inclusion, and equal pay for women athletes. She has been a consistent voice against injustices. Former President Trump targeted her for criticism even as she was leading the United States Women’s National Team to its fourth World Cup victory in 2019. I would love it if she could finish her international career by helping the United States Women’s National Team to become the first women’s or men’s team to win a third consecutive World Cup. The USWNT’s first game in the tournment’s group stage is against Vietnam on Friday, July 21, at 6 p.m. pacific time.
The Closer
Speaking of the 2023 Women’s World Cup, the event kicks off on Thursday, July 20. This year’s edition is being hosted by Australia and New Zealand. One of the best ways to get prepared is to read the new The Women’s Game newsletter from the Men in Blazers network. Meg Swanick, one of my favorite women’s soccer journalists, has been previewing each of the groups this week. She will provide daily updates on the action when the tournament starts. You can subscribe by clicking here.
Post-Game Comments
Today’s Thought from my Readwise collection:
“No one can lie to you without your approval. The liar and the recipient participate in a fabric of mythmaking together. A lie does not have power by its utterance—its power lies in someone agreeing to believe the lie.” (Pamela Meyer, Liespotting: Proven Techniques to Detect Deception)
Thank you for reading Things I Find Interesting. This post is public so feel free to share it.
Thank you for reading my newsletter. Let me know what you think about what you’ve read. Send me things you’ve found interesting! You can email me at craigcheslog@substack.com.
Please help me spread the word about this newsletter by sharing this post via email or on the social media network of your choice. And if you haven’t already, please consider signing up for a free or paid subscription.
Things I Find Interesting is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Be First to Comment