Might we see an opinion authored by the Chief, declaring that Trump's financials are fair game, in evidence, for a Congressional investigation (as plainly contemplated by -- among other statutes -- 5 U.S.C. app. 4 § 101)?
Just thought I'd take a wild leap, here. [I realize this would be light-speed early, for a decision, of any kind.]
But, if Justice Gorsuch is (finally) willing to read the plain English -- and logic -- of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to mean what it says (i.e., make good on the promises embedded therein), then perhaps a 6-3 majority will also read plain English -- and logic -- into the post-Watergate-era Ethics in Government Act of 1978. We shall see. . . . smiling.
नमस्ते
2 comments:
another proper decision: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rules-trump-cannot-end-daca-big-win-dreamer-n1115116
Indeed! Thank you, Anon.
The most encouraging part, for me -- beyond the actual specifics of the decision -- is that the three reactionary ideologues (i.e., reliable dissenters) are increasingly floating on their own "island of the lost" -- left in the Nineteenth Century.
Smile. . . new post up now. . . .
Namaste. . . .
Post a Comment