* * *
The real question is
whether the public, to whom the defendant is constantly appealing, will. And that includes the jury, one member of
which can cause it to be a ‘hung’ jury.
And that jury, as of now, will be composed of residents of Florida, home
of many followers of the defendant, whose messaging is difficult to avoid there.
That’s why the
prosecution may also bring charges in New Jersey where the violation of the law
in regard to the documents also occurred, at the defendant’s Bedminster golf
club there. The built-in bias of a
Florida jury might be absent there.
And in addition, Federal
indictments for inciting the January 6 riots and attempts to defy the
Constitution’s electoral vote counting provisions, as well as charges in
Georgia in regard to the defendant’s efforts to get the voting results there
changed, still threaten him.
So many arrows are
flying at the indicted former president that he has given up hope of winning
in Court, short of an insanity plea. His hopes of avoiding conviction when one of these arrows
squarely hit the bullseye are based entirely on convincing his gullible
followers to re-elect him in 2024 so that he might pardon himself and avoid
If Americans are that stupid, it is time to think ‘outside of the box’ for a solution. Some might even consider emigration.
* * *
The Supreme Court came through with a great decision this week, giving great hope to those who cherish democracy in the United States. Here’s what the New York Times had to say about it on Tuesday.
Court Rejects Theory That Would Have Transformed American Elections - The
6-3 majority dismissed the “independent state legislature” theory, which would
have given state lawmakers nearly unchecked power over federal elections.
“The Supreme Court on Tuesday that
would have radically reshaped how federal elections are conducted by giving
state legislatures largely unchecked power to set all sorts of rules for
federal elections and to draw congressional maps warped by partisan
The vote was 6 to 3,
with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. writing the majority opinion. The
Constitution, he said, “does not exempt state legislatures from the ordinary
constraints imposed by state law.” In this case, that meant the legislature
could not overrule State court decisions, such as those knocking down a legislature's gerrymandering.
Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Neil M. Gorsuch dissented.
The case concerned the
“independent state legislature” theory. The doctrine is based on a reading of
the Constitution’s ,
which says, “The times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and
representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof.”
In recognizing that the theory did not apply in Moore vs Harper (expounded upon in great length in this blog’s Dec. 10, 2022, posting), it turned out that Justices Barrett and Kavanaugh came down on the side of democracy, leaving only Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Alito somewhere else.
And that ‘somewhere
else’ remains a dangerous place for the nation.
On other issues that threaten democracy, there is hope for Kavanaugh and
Barrett, other than in regard to abortions, to which Barrett is irrevocably
opposed. Frankly, I still feel that
expansion of the Supreme Court is necessary as pointed out in the last posting
For those of you who watch MSNBC, the
attorney who successfully pleaded the case before the SCOTUS was Neal Kaytal, a
frequent commentator there.
But the SCOTUS also this week ruled against the continuing use of affirmative action as part of colleges’ admission process. This meant that using race as one of the criteria for admission, whereby applicants with better academic records would be turned down and replaced by less accomplished applicants, but ones whose social and educational experience had limited their level of accomplishment, would no longer be possible.
Such applicants usually did not come from areas with top-rated academic public high schools nor expensive private schools that traditionally best prepared students for college. They didn't live in the right places or come from wealth.
Because such students were typically persons
of color or Latino, the result was a lack of diversity among those
admitted. Hence, affirmative action
practices grew over the past half century in order to secure their admission, where academic achievement could not, and this resulted in such practices being seen by some as being racially based. And now, the SCOTUS joins those with those who believe that they indeed are.
The Court’s ruling took such admissions as amounting to racial discrimination turned inside-out, no worse than practices that might deny them admission because of race, and disallowed it. Racial discrimination is racial discrimination, regardless of how it is used, the opinion suggested. Here is an excerpt from Chief Justice Roberts' opinion.
“The Harvard and U.N.C. admissions programs cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the equal protection clause”... “Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping and lack meaningful end points.”
It appears to me that this decision will result in a significant increase in acceptance of applicants from Asian backgrounds, who do well academically, and fewer from those with Black or Latino backgrounds. Incidentally, colleges that primarily cater to Black students would benefit from this decision. Although not as large as the anticipated increase in Asian admissions, there also will be an increase in the admissions of White applicants as well, but this might be somewhat balanced by the ending of existing discrimination in favor of children of faculty, alumni, and donors which is also taking place.
Chief Justice Roberts’ opinion left open the opportunity for those who would have otherwise qualified for admission through affirmative action to now make that point through the essays (he called it 'discussion') that usually are part of the application process. He must have had pangs of conscience. That would mean more essays on subjects like ‘why my high school had so many shootings and pregnancies’ rather than ones describing an applicant’s collection of butterfly specimens or how they learned to swim.
Something strange is going on in baseball. Pitching is becoming dominant over hitting. More and more box scores are starting to look something like this:
Visiting Team 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 2 0 - 3 6
Home Team 1 0 0
0 0 0 2 2 0 - 5 7
Starting pitching is
getting much better but bullpens are becoming inconsistent, except for
closers most of the time. It’s the relief pitchers who are giving up the winning runs. Or is it
And speaking of
baseball, I still prefer all of its interdependent mechanics, sparkling
fielding plays, running the basepaths, battles between pitchers and batters, juggling
mound rotations, to the sports in which winning simply depends on getting a
ball across a goal line (football) or getting it into a net (basketball or
soccer) or doing the same with a puck (hockey).
And as for expansion of
the sport, when political problems are resolved, and ultimately they will be, I
envision major league teams in Mexico City, Caracas, and Havana.
Finally, the presence of
wagering sites on most online sports programming is disconcerting. It is not healthy for any sport, professional
or college, including baseball. Much more about that will appear in the next blog posting.
* * *
Readers of Jackspotpourri might enjoy, and learn from, the daily postings of Heather Cox Richardson, Professor of American History at Boston College. Find them at https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/ or just CLICK HERE TO GET THERE.
* * *
Email Alerts: If you are NOT receiving emails from me alerting you each time there is a new posting on Jackspotpourri, just send me your email address and we’ll see that you do. And if you are forwarding a posting to someone, you might suggest that they do the same, so they will be similarly alerted. (You can pass those email addresses to me by email at email@example.com .)
Forwarding Postings: Please forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it.
If you want to send someone the blog, exactly as you are now seeing it, with all of its bells and whistles, you can just tell folks to check it out by visiting https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com
There’s another, perhaps easier, method of forwarding it
though! Google Blogspot, the platform on which Jackspotpourri is prepared,
makes that possible. If you click on the tiny envelope with the arrow at
the bottom of every posting, you will have the opportunity to list up to
ten email addresses to which the blog will be forwarded, along with a comment
from you. Each will receive a
link to the textual portion only of the blog that you now are reading, but without
the illustrations, colors, variations in typography, or the ‘sidebar’ features
such as access to the blog’s archives.
Either way will work, sending them the link to https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com, or clicking on the envelope at the bottom of this posting, but I recommend sending them the link.
Again, I urge you to forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it.
Have a nice day!
* * *