Holly Brewer's avatar

Holly Brewer

@earlymodjustice.bsky.social

693 followers 384 following 122 posts

Historian
earlymodernjustice.org/
Opinions my own

Holly Brewer's avatar Holly Brewer @earlymodjustice.bsky.social
[ View ]

Key to this thread: The majority decision in Trump v. US mentions separation of powers, and protecting a “vigorous” executive. But it ignores balance of power altogether— and unusually for an important Supreme Court case, fails to address the potential costs of their intervention.

0 replies 1 reposts 1 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Seth Cotlar's avatar Seth Cotlar @sethcotlar.bsky.social
[ View ]

When I first saw this I thought "no, that can't possibly be true." But alas, the Times did indeed choose today of all days to publish a right winger's recycled piece about how they don't vote, failing to mention that the author basically thinks absolutist theocracies are cool.

15 replies 81 reposts 370 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Josh Chafetz's avatar Josh Chafetz @joshchafetz.bsky.social
[ View ]

On this July 4, please pause to remember that one of the colonists’ complaints in the Declaration was that the Crown was paying its judges.

10 replies 360 reposts 1204 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Bart Bonikowski's avatar Bart Bonikowski @bartbonikowski.bsky.social
[ View ]

An aspiring dictator & convicted felon w history of treason may win the presidency. Profoundly corrupt SCOTUS justices undermined the constitution and gave him immunity from prosecution for past & future crimes. This is all political journalists should be writing about 24/7. We’re at the precipice.

23 replies 191 reposts 645 likes

Holly Brewer's avatar Holly Brewer @earlymodjustice.bsky.social
[ View ]

Key to this thread: The majority decision in Trump v. US mentions separation of powers, and protecting a “vigorous” executive. But it ignores balance of power altogether— and unusually for an important Supreme Court case, fails to address the potential costs of their intervention.

0 replies 1 reposts 1 likes

Holly Brewer's avatar Holly Brewer @earlymodjustice.bsky.social
[ View ]

There’s been so much criticism of public education —claims that supposedly “woke” curriculums at public high schools are not teaching “founding principles.” But public schools don’t seem to be the problem here. No wonder the majority on the court don’t seem to value balance of power. 🤷‍♀️

1 replies 0 reposts 2 likes

Holly Brewer's avatar Holly Brewer @earlymodjustice.bsky.social
[ View ]

No wonder they don’t understand the concept of balance of power! It would be interesting to explore the high school curriculum of the other justices who attended private high schools. Did they also never study civics?
www.washingtonpost.com/news/educati...

1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes

Holly Brewer's avatar Holly Brewer @earlymodjustice.bsky.social
[ View ]

Problem solved. I just checked Georgetown Prep, the private high school which two of our Supreme Court justices attended (Gorsuch, Kavanaugh). Students there never study civics or government. Here’s Sophomore year, for example. Four years of theology though.

1 replies 1 reposts 5 likes

Holly Brewer's avatar Holly Brewer @earlymodjustice.bsky.social
[ View ]

The majority decision in Trump v. US mentions separation of powers, and protecting a “vigorous” executive. But it ignores balance of power altogether— and unusually for an important Supreme Court case, fails to address the potential costs of their intervention.

0 replies 1 reposts 3 likes

Holly Brewer's avatar Holly Brewer @earlymodjustice.bsky.social
[ View ]

I started to wonder whether some of the Supreme Court justices skipped their 10th grade government class. Just checked with my teenager who went to public HS. Yep. Checks & balances is one of the first things they learned about American Government. But maybe they don’t study that in private school?

1 replies 0 reposts 3 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Seth Cotlar's avatar Seth Cotlar @sethcotlar.bsky.social
[ View ]

Just read Thomas's concurrence in the Trump case and OMG, the mendacity! Thomas says yes, the President is immune, but also the appointment of special council Smith was an abuse of Presidential power that threatens the foundations of American liberty. He cites Thomas Paine to back this up. Wut?....

10 replies 34 reposts 140 likes

Holly Brewer's avatar Holly Brewer @earlymodjustice.bsky.social
[ View ]

That’s what I think. Well not just the Bill of rights but other measures. — Thus my focus on the 1686 case here. —newrepublic.com/article/183357/supreme-court-turns-president-king

0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

b-boy bouiebaisse's avatar b-boy bouiebaisse @jbouie.bsky.social
[ View ]

i think akhil amar reed captures something very important, which is that the roberts court rewrote article ii, which explicitly states that a president can be held criminally liable after impeachment (and which has long been understood to mean that he can be held liable after leaving office)

23 replies 408 reposts 1251 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Dr. Holly Walters's avatar Dr. Holly Walters @manigarm.bsky.social
[ View ]

Don't forget the Sharpie.

16 replies 389 reposts 1727 likes

Holly Brewer's avatar Holly Brewer @earlymodjustice.bsky.social
[ View ]

The convention parliament of 1689 was so, so furious about this case, and about the judges who said that James II was above the law & could ignore the laws of the realm.

0 replies 1 reposts 1 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Annemarie Cancienne's avatar Annemarie Cancienne @cancienne.bsky.social
[ View ]

A great read on the Supreme Court’s decision to create an American King. The options now seem to be: expand the courts, and/or invite the Dutch to take over the executive branch. (A double power move by the Dems, given the natural height advantage of the Dutch)

0 replies 2 reposts 2 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Heidi Kitrosser's avatar Heidi Kitrosser @heidikitrosser.bsky.social
[ View ]

This is a must-read article on how the immunity opinion flies in the face of history and the rule of law

0 replies 5 reposts 12 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Brooke Newman 's avatar Brooke Newman @brookenewman.bsky.social
[ View ]

“They wrote ‘Nor may courts deem an action unofficial merely because it allegedly violates a generally applicable law.’ Official acts cannot be prosecuted, even when they clearly violate a law, any law. Jackson was correct in her dissent when she wrote that future presidents would be unconstrained.”

0 replies 3 reposts 9 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Dan Margolies's avatar Dan Margolies @danmargolies.bsky.social
[ View ]

"Today’s Supreme Court has just recreated one of the most despicable cases in English history, a case that signified the apex of absolutism in British history and was repudiated by a revolution for the damage it caused. "

0 replies 2 reposts 4 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Seth D. Michaels 's avatar Seth D. Michaels @sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ]

really well done and explains the scale of this decision

0 replies 1 reposts 12 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Kevin Gannon 's avatar Kevin Gannon @thetattooedprof.bsky.social
[ View ]

Today's must-read. Everything has a history, including yesterday's judicial coup on behalf of the executive, now possessing legal immunities that would be the envy of an absolute monarch.

10 replies 64 reposts 179 likes

Holly Brewer's avatar Holly Brewer @earlymodjustice.bsky.social
[ View ]

In principle it might still be possible to proceed. But there are a few other parts of the ruling that act as additional procedural bars . One is that official acts are very broadly conceived. Another is that evidence related to them connot be used in the prosecution related to unofficial acts, etc

0 replies 0 reposts 6 likes

Holly Brewer's avatar Holly Brewer @earlymodjustice.bsky.social
[ View ]

Burn effigies like they did in 1776 ? Seriously — some kind of peaceful protest or demonstration? Or recommitment to a few basic fundamental values?

1 replies 0 reposts 4 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Zoomer Antimillenarian's avatar Zoomer Antimillenarian @surcomplicated.bsky.social
[ View ]

In the piece below, @earlymodjustice.bsky.social finds precedent for the insane Trump v. US ruling. Naturally, it's the ruling that James II of England used to make himself an absolute monarch.

Three years later, he was overthrown.

0 replies 3 reposts 15 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

costrike's avatar costrike @costrike.bsky.social
[ View ]

"The Founders were hardly all wise or all knowing, but they did understand a history that we have now forgotten. There’s a reason that they so carefully included accountability for governors, and presidents, and wanted it for kings."

0 replies 2 reposts 7 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Adam Rothman's avatar Adam Rothman @adamrothman.bsky.social
[ View ]

"Today’s Supreme Court has just recreated one of the most despicable cases in English history, a case that signified the apex of absolutism in British history and was repudiated by a revolution for the damage it caused."

5 replies 85 reposts 246 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Anna O Law's avatar Anna O Law @unlawfulentries.bsky.social
[ View ]

I wrote a book on the 19th century Supreme Court and the terrible, horrible, no good, very bad Roger Taney who infamously wrote in Dred Scott v Sanford that enslaved & free Black people had "no rights which the white man was bound to respect." I agree with Bouie that Roberts is comparably bad.

1 replies 25 reposts 100 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Seth D. Michaels 's avatar Seth D. Michaels @sethdmichaels.bsky.social
[ View ]

maybe seizing and arresting the Supreme Court majority for aiding and abetting an attempt to overthrow the U.S. government can be a "core constitutional duty" and an "official act," why not

48 replies 497 reposts 1885 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Eponymous for now's avatar Eponymous for now @polyeclectic.bsky.social
[ View ]

“Five members of the Supreme Court of the United States want to take us back to seventeenth-century absolutism. In a stunning rejection of originalist interpretation, and in defiance of the single statement carved onto the front of the majestic building where they work (‘Equal justice under law’…” 👇

0 replies 5 reposts 13 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Gautham FC's avatar Gautham FC @gauthamrao.bsky.social
[ View ]

If you don’t know @earlymodjustice.bsky.social, her research that eventually convinced Pence about the impropriety of ‘alternate’ electors theory on January 6, 2021. She was a lead authors on the brief that destroyed the originalist case for pres immunity. Here’s her take on today’s decision

1 replies 13 reposts 27 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Stephen West's avatar Stephen West @stephenwest.bsky.social
[ View ]

The Charles Sumner School Museum and Archives, located in Washington DC, is one of 7 new sites added to the Reconstruction Era National Historic Network 🗃️

www.nps.gov/reer/learn/n...

0 replies 9 reposts 24 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Don Moynihan's avatar Don Moynihan @donmoyn.bsky.social
[ View ]

You will never guess which Judges voted to make it easier for public officials to receive gifts.

32 replies 349 reposts 1170 likes

Reposted by Holly Brewer

Reposted by Holly Brewer