Constitution Day

September 17 was Constitution Day and David Souter's Birthday. Meanwhile, Trump continues to be anti-constitutional, including regarding the Media. Happy Suffrage Day (comments).

Five Years Later ...

Five years ago, Dobbs was foreshadowed when the Supreme Court (short unsigned opinion) left in place a six-week abortion ban. Roberts and the liberals, in varying degrees, dissented. 

Esther's Army

 

I write about a book concerning conservative women here. 

RIP Dolly Parton

Dolly Parton has had serious health problems recently, so the news is not totally surprising. We just don't like to hear it. She was eighty years old.  

My mom listened to a country music radio station while we grew up. So I had exposure to country music while growing up in New York City. I like various country music singers. 

I like Dolly Parton. Erik Loomis provides a largely positive obituary here, including honoring her talent and business savvy. He references a 1960s song about a pregnant woman committing suicide after being abandoned. 

She was a feminist. One thing he notes is that she did not speak out against her state's anti-trans legislation.

Parton is regularly cited as an LGBTQ ally. She was careful not to bluntly oppose certain laws. But people knew where she stood. In the 1980s, she said this:

“I got a huge gay following and some really macho-looking women,” Parton told Andy Warhol in a conversation for a 1984 Interview cover story. “To me, people are people. … Many of my friends are gay, male and female. I don’t judge people. I don’t care what people do in their bedrooms and people shouldn’t care what I do in mine.”

The anti-LGBTQ movement is based on hate, lack of empathy, and scare tactics. People, however, overall found same sex marriage not a big deal. Parton was accepting, loving, and knew it was not a big scary thing. 

When asked, early on, she made jokes about gays now having the same problems as straights. [I heard a form of this on today's Gay USA episode.] 

Of course, she didn't really think marriage was bad. She was married for almost sixty years. 

[ETA: A Wikipedia page is available.]

Dolly was pro-labor, including all those people required to produce her music. Not just for one film.

She was loving, funny, and honored by people she worked with. As the actress Daryl Hannah noted on Bluesky:

I could tell you stories & you would love ‘em, but they wouldn’t make you love her more than you already do. We will always love her.

Her reading charity is well-cited. Her family recommended people donate to it instead of flowers. 

She also was pro-vaccine:

When the COVID-19 pandemic upended lives around the world, country music legend Dolly Parton found her own way to lead in a crisis.

Her $1 million donation to Vanderbilt University Medical Center to help expedite development of the Moderna vaccine gained international recognition. A Guardian correspondent even suggested naming the shot, "The Dolly."

Parton didn't stop there. Photographers captured her on March 2, 2021, donning a face mask and getting the vaccine in a public show of trust. During a scary and confusing crisis, she was a voice of calm, singing improvised lyrics of "Vaccine" to the tune of her megahit "Jolene."

Trump offerred her a Medal of Freedom. She begged off, concerned about traveling during COVID and other reasons. Later, Dolly was wary about Biden giving her one. It might be seen as "political" if she accepted. She had red and blue fans. 

He announced flags will be flown at half-mast in her honor. 

The actor Tim Curry also died. Many honor his many roles, especially his gender bending role in the Rocky Horror Picture Show. He was gloriously "weird." 

Dolly Parton was pretty outrageous too. Let us allow their spirit to live on, even as we wish "another 80-year-old died." Anyway, I don't think Dolly would have liked people saying that. 

Beauty and The Beast

I sometimes watch DVDs with someone who has not watched many of the films that many have seen. I recently re-watched Enchanted with her. Last night was B&B. The animated version. 

(Years later, we had the live-action version. Kevin Kline played the grandfather.) 

Multiple familiar actors do the voices, including the person who later played the gruff police officer Lenny on Law & Order, though some might remember him from Dirty Dancing. 

[Jerry Orbach had done some stage work.*]

The film has some good songs. It also has scary parts, including when wolves threaten Belle.

The "heavy" is also a rather cruel character. His flunky reminds somewhat of the flunky in Enchanted.

His being a sexist boor is one thing. Then, he goes next level. Again, I can see some parents being like the mother of "Chip," and thinking their children were too young for some of this.

True enough, the original fairy tales were rather dark. But we generally have a sanitized version. Up to a point. Not quite as dark as this.

One thing that is somewhat lost is that this is supposed to be taking place in France. A few of the servants are French, but Belle and many of the others do not sound very French.

I guess the original edit was deemed inappropriate. 

The film is about true love conquering all -- both familial (Belle sacrifices herself for her father) and romantic (a beauty falls for a beast). Also, about the dangers of appearances. Dreaming of more. 

And, of course, the power of reading.

The true symbol that all is well is when they kiss. For the value of a true love kiss, see either Enchanted or a Hallmark Channel film. A kiss is a standard finale. 

==

* Jerry Orbach, to be clear, did a significant amount of stage work. Many people only know him as "Lenny." 

His first appearance on the show -- the actor -- was a one-episode guest role portraying someone else. If footnotes are not the place for trivia, what is? 

Other Films 

To toss it in there, since the film is so popular, they decided to do some spin-offs. Oh, you mean after the events of the film? No silly. 

People like the enchanted castle stuff. So, looking at the plot summaries, the stories generally involve stuff that would have taken place during the film. 

It might not be completely clear (it wasn't for me), but the "time skip" entry here suggests the film takes place over an extended period. So, there is plenty of time for additional "enchanted" content. 

As to the live-action film, there was also one back in the day. Tubi shows me there are multiple live-action versions without all the enchanted details. 

I once started watching the live-action version of the animated film that this entry discusses. It didn't really, including the lead, catch my interest. 

It also tosses in various extra details, which aren't really necessary and might be counterproductive. Still, I think I will try to watch it again. 

ETA: I did try to watch it again. Not interested. 

Jessica Kellgren-Fozard

 

JKF's video came into my YouTube feed. 

She has some interesting content, especially related to LGBTQ and disability issues. She is a lesbian mother and with various disabilities. She has a quirky voice though you can tell here (when she is tired) it is somewhat an affect. 

We can be overwhelmed with all of this content. But it also is amazing, huh? Should I check up more on stuff that would turn me off? Probably. You know, watch a bit of Fox News or a dubious podcaster. OTOH, there is so much other stuff. Oh well. 

I Spit On Your Grave

Checking Tubi, I see the original and the sequel are available. I hold to my earlier remarks. The author of a (defunct) blog named after the film continues to post on social media (including Bluesky) and elsewhere. The sequel looks ridiculous (and ridiculously overlong). 

ETA: I saw Angel (or parts of it). Some 1980s exploitation film charm with breast shots. The lead (in her 20s but playing a teen prostitute) doesn't really do much other than look like a good girl with sorta slutty makeup. Also, Mama Weed (French film) was decent. 

Missionary, Birthright Citizenship, Gay USA

I cover various topics on Substack, including how the Trump Administration is honoring a Catholic martyr while violating all he stood for. Also, co-host of Gay USA retires after thirty years. 

I recently watched Once and Again on YouTube. I vaguely recall watching at least some of it. It was first on before this blog began (mid-2003). I found one passing reference on the blog. 

Senator Lindsey Graham Dies

He had his moments. He was lately a tired, pathetic Trump supporter. More here with an extended bit on Mitch McConnell. 

LGBTQ Films

I re-watched Boy Meets Girl (trans) and Liberty's Secret (lesbian), both of which I referenced on this blog. They are free online. There are several gay and lesbian films on places like YouTube or Tubi. I am trying to find some more trans-related romantic films. 

(Re-reading my comment on Liberty's Secret, I understand the reviewer's concerns. The romance aspect is curiously restrained. Overall, imperfections noted, I still liked the film.)

There is a tendency to focus on transgirls, especially in the sports context. I'm a heterosexual. Sure. I like transgirl romances. There was something on YouTube about feminization. It later became dark. But a positive film about that would be good too. 

SCOTUS Watch: Summer Recess

The shitty trans athletes opinion shows the importance of voluntary trans protections, including those in New York.

The summer recess begins. The justices will have to address some things that pop up. They also have scheduled stuff:

For your planning purposes, summer order lists are scheduled to be issued on Monday, July 20; Monday, August 17; and Friday, September 4, 2026. Summer order lists usually consist of actions taken by the Court on motions in pending cases, petitions for rehearing, and other miscellaneous matters. Emergency orders, such as in applications for stays, will continue to be released as required.

Fix the Court suggests justices should circuit ride. I think it would be a decent idea if they spent more time in the lower courts. One idea: have each circuit justice preside over en banc hearings. 

The justices (minus two) might not be great at being district court judges. But I'm open to some thoughts.

We can spend the summer thinking about the Supreme Court. People think "court reform" means more justices. Let's think further. It's more than that. 

ETA: A pending case on the shadow docket involved a stay for reporter Catherine Herridge, who faced a daily $800 fine for refusing to name her sources in a Privacy Act lawsuit. 

Chris Geidner has the details. The facts go back at least to 2017, but now she has superlawyer Paul Clement on her side. No dice. Only Kavanaugh, without comment, would have granted the stay. 

(The lower panel had judges from the Carter, Biden, and Trump administrations, nomination-wise.) 

The final decision was handed down Thursday. It shows that we still will have some miscellaneous stuff popping up during the summer recess. 

Once upon a time, the Supreme Court was officially out of session. If it wanted to hear something as a group, they had to make a special effort. Individual justices handled things in the meanwhile.  

That is no longer the case. The individual justices still handle circuit matters. Nonetheless, the Court as a whole is still in session.  

Indiana and Tennessee Declare June as Nuclear Family Month

I discuss the various problems with this here. I toss in a link to an amusing "drag comedy" that is also a satire of teenage films. 

SCOTUS Watch: Order List

A ten-page Order List with various odds and ends.

Chris Geidner notes on Bluesky:

Also in today’s orders, SCOTUS sidesteps ruling on private enforcement of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, sending two cases back for post-Callais reconsideration. Jackson dissents, pointing out that Callais had nothing to do with private enforcement and saying she would have summarily reversed.

Rick Hasen summarized:

Justice Jackson dissented from the order, on the sensible grounds that Callais did not consider the right to sue question. Of course, the stakes are much lower now that Section 2 is essentially dead no matter who sues.

(His colleague was more sympathetic.) 

Also, a cert grant (per Geidner):

The Supreme Court takes up a case over whether employees of federally funded schools can sue to enforce Title IX’s sex discrimination bar. 

Kavanaugh, without comment, noted he would have granted cert. in another case. If you do a docket search (on another page since the Order page does not provide links):

Whether a multiemployer pension plan that terminated through mass withdrawal before the 2020 plan year is eligible for Special Financial Assistance under 29 U.S.C. 1432(b)(1)(A).

Alito and Barrett didn't take part in the examination of a couple of cases. Again, only Kagan and Jackson regularly explain why they do that. 

Sotomayor added a brief statement noting that she agreed with the court not taking a criminal case because the government admitted error and the defendant received all that was requested for. 

The next thing on the schedule is an opinion day on Thursday. Next week's orders will be on Tuesday because of the holiday. 

===

I agree with Steve Vladeck that justices should show up more in front of Congress. Court reform includes multiple things, including some that should have bipartisan support. This is one such proposal. 

Religious Liberty Commission Follies

At a Monday (April 13) hearing at the Museum of the Bible in Washington, D.C., Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, a Republican and the chair of the commission, asked, “Would it not be a good recommendation that every school, every university, every business, has to have that one sheet on the bulletin board about protecting people’s religious liberty, and that the separation of church and state is the biggest lie that’s been told in America since our founding?”

The Trump Religious Liberty Commission meeting at the Museum of the Bible (book) is fitting. The museum is an evangelical enterprise significantly funded by Hobby Lobby. 

The chair argued that "the anti-God left has used ["separation of church and state"] to suppress people of religion in our country." This is the "biggest lie" told in America since our founding. "Slavery is a positive good" is third or fourth, perhaps. 

Religious liberty is extremely important. It is also highly debated. But the commission is not set up for an honest discussion. The discussion might offer references to Baptists, Madison, and Jefferson strongly supporting state/church separation. 

This caricature of right-wing beliefs leads some to disdain any talk about religion. We will get references to fantasy people in the sky or some such thing. 

A pending case reflects one single-minded view. A Catholic organization wants an exception to an LGBTQ equality provision. Another lawsuit involves a hospice that claims a religious exemption from a trans equality provision. 

I find such litigation selfish. Not all Catholics believe in this anti-LGBTQ doctrine. Regardless, if you want to take part in public affairs, including public welfare services, it is not outrageous that basic equality has to be followed. 

Is this what you want to worry about when providing hospice care to people? Not allowing them rooms in their self-designated genders? Will you only provide them care if they pray to Jesus Christ, too? How shallow a Christian you are. 

(Catholic nuns don't use birth control.* That is b.s., too. The concern has to be the employees. 

Some janitors at a school can't have birth control, even if it is their own employment-based health care. Some sisters realize that it is moronic.)

Last month, Meenu Batra, 53, who has lived in the South Texas border colonia of Laguna Heights since 2002, was on her way to Milwaukee, Wisconsin, to work another case. She’s been a court interpreter for over 20 years, the only one licensed in Texas for Hindi, Punjabi, or Urdu. Her language skills are requested nationwide, where she’s contracted to help people making their way through the immigration court system, just as she did for herself 35 years ago when she immigrated from India to New Jersey before settling in Texas.

I think this is probably a more troublesome threat to religious liberty. Such a translator is likely used by Hindus and other minority faiths partially to obtain religious services. 

Respect for immigrants is generally a religious obligation in many faiths. Some people do oppose anti-immigration policies, especially those of a Trumpian nature, on religious grounds.

Is the presence of "woke" religions a "big lie," too? 

==

Note: Maybe some Catholic nuns do use birth control. Some gay priests are sexually active. 

The "birth control" also sometimes has other health uses. I'm not sure how much that comes up with Catholic nuns. I assume they are not deemed "sluts" if they use it for non-contraceptive reasons. 

SCOTUS Watch

Order List

The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to weigh in on a procedural question arising from a pregnancy discrimination case – specifically, whether a defendant can raise an affirmative defense (that is, a legal excuse or justification) later in the proceedings when it did not raise that defense in the answer to the plaintiff’s complaint.

After a brief order list, Sotomayor (with Jackson) spends some time explaining why the justices should have taken a criminal justice case. Finding troubling criminal justice cases that suggest the arbitrary nature of the criminal justice system is her thing.  

(The opening link provides more details) 

Opinions 

Happy Trans Visibility Day, which once was allegedly an anti-Easter plot or something, since it coincidentally overlapped that year. By chance, the justices decided the conversion therapy case.

Justice Gorsuch, having the opinion (which, like multiple other opinions he had in cultural war cases, was procedurally dubious), was a bad sign. Worse, only Jackson dissented. It was a good dissent. 

(Jackson used a Calvinball ruling -- see Breyer's angry dissent -- to her benefit. Okay. But realistically, that is how it is going to be. Selective application.) 

The conservatives upheld anti-trans care policies, even though such policies clearly have ideological motivations. This time, when trans people are protected, the regulation is suddenly thought control.

The law involves the regulation of people with a state license to practice medicine and only covers minors. So, it is not about the conversion therapy of adults or therapy by unlicensed people, including clergy. 

Under this logic, any medical treatment delivered through words rather than instruments could now carry First Amendment protection—a framework that could shield a doctor who encourages a patient to commit suicide, a dietician who tells an anorexic patient to eat less, or a therapist who deliberately steers a vulnerable client away from life-saving treatment. It could also extend well beyond medicine: a financial advisor who talks an elderly client into a bad investment is exercising speech-based professional conduct, as is a lawyer who gives harmful legal advice.

Not good. Kagan (with Sotomayor) concurred in full, citing an alleged limitation. But, as Jackson noted, the limitation in context is fictional. If they concurred strategically, Gorsuch's language is far from restrained.

The opinion says strict scrutiny is required. Some misleading coverage aside, the Court did not strike down the law. Colorado has a higher test to meet. 

But that is usually an uphill battle. Gorsuch's rhetoric, as SCOTUSBlog flags, is also not reassuring:

But the Supreme Court also strongly hinted that the ban would fail that test. In his 23-page opinion, Gorsuch stressed that in cases like Chiles’, Colorado’s ban “censors speech based on viewpoint.” Because the First Amendment “reflects … a judgment that every American possesses an inalienable right to think and speak freely, and a faith in the free marketplace of ideas as the best means for discovering truth,” Gorsuch continued, “any law that suppresses speech based on viewpoint represents an ‘egregious’ assault on both of those commitments.”

The possible Robert Kennedy Jr.-ing of medical care is not ideal. I say that even if the opinion leaves open a way to uphold this law (strict scrutiny met) or to craft another policy that will protect children. 

Kagan, in the past, disliked "Lochner-ing" or the weaponizing of the First Amendment. Blah. 

Upcoming

The conference was on Thursday, given the Easter weekend. Monday will be an Order List. They then take a two-week break until April 17th. 

A media advisory regarding an oral argument that will likely have more demand for sitting flags the change at the top of Homeland Security. 

(ETA: The SCOTUS PIO released a statement on a news story involving Alito going to get checked out -- he is in his 70s, so this wasn't that notable on its own -- but didn't post it on the website. Yet again.)

Birthright Citizenship Trivia

Trump showed up for the birthright citizenship oral argument (left after the solicitor general was done), which would be the first time a sitting president did so. Notably, he picked this case to do so.

Talk about this being an "attempt to intimidate the justices" seems a tad overblown. Separation of powers? Eh. Members of Congress show up. 

Nixon and John Quincy Adams argued cases. Lincoln, too (a more forgotten detail). Not while in office, of course. Taft became Chief Justice. Ditto. 

John Marshall served as Secretary of State briefly after becoming Chief Justice. The Constitution does not -- unlike for members of Congress -- clearly ban that sort of thing. Justices also served in diplomatic roles. Robert Jackson was a prosecutor at Nuremberg.

Daughter of Daring

I used to keep track of and watch the Oscars. Now, I am barely familiar with some of the films. Instead, I read Daughter of Daring, which is not only a biography of a stuntwoman/actor, but a history of film and Hollywood (with a woman's focus) overall. 

I have also read her Creature from the Black Lagoon book. Both are good. Down-to-earth style, while quite detailed. Fun footnotes. 

ETA: One interesting tidbit is how cliffhanger serials and other films attracted women viewers as escapes and an example of women having agency, including for lower class women.

Mayor Mamdani appoints trans woman to run first-ever NYC Office of LGBTQIA+ Affairs

We are amidst a time of attack, from the executive department of the U.S. on down, against trans people. 

The Supreme Court has (except in the Bostock case) looked on and said, "You go!" though a few justices would say, "Go faster!" It is not all dark. But it is quite scary for many.

Mayor Mamdani was a strong ally during his campaign. Trans people now, even though it has been less than three months, are impatient for action. 

Some, including those noting they are part of the community (one on Bluesky said they had a trans child), are willing to optimistically give him a chance. Others are more pessimistic and/or cynical.

Given the stakes and situation, that's understandable.  Again, there is no single reaction here. We need to generally practice human empathy and discernment. 

The establishment of the office comes at an uncertain time for access to gender-affirming care for trans youth in New York — a city that also functions as a sanctuary destination for families elsewhere in the U.S. seeking such care. In February, NYU Langone, one of the foremost providers of gender-affirming care in the city, announced that it would cease the provision of such care to minors, citing the “current regulatory environment.” 

NY Attorney General Letitia James demanded that the hospital resume, with a deadline that just passed, because of state human rights law. We shall see. 

The move, a form of obedience in advance, by NYU Langone, shows some of the results of the human rights violations of the Trump Administration, which is a disgrace to this nation every second they (illegally) continue their injustices. 

We need more anger and passion about how horrible things are. One day, we will have to reconstruct our nation. The will to do so has to come with an understanding of the stakes. The harm to trans people is just one of so many examples of what we have to address. It is taken to such cruel levels. 

My "impatient" link shows that there are means for the city government to address the situation. Erin Reed and other trans advocates want to know what the mayor is going to do. 

The establishment of the first Mayor’s Office for LGBTQIA+ affairs and the appointment of the first out trans person to lead a New York City office as director provide a key avenue to address such things. 

A question posed at the announcement addressed the hospital issue:

Question: I'm curious how you see the city's role, potentially this office's role, in responding to actions like NYU Langone and other health institutions moving to end gender-affirming care. And I'm wondering if the city has a role in responding to that, and if you've talked about that at all in discussions with President Trump. 

Mayor Mamdani: I think the city has a role in standing up for the rights of New Yorkers and ensuring the compliance with the law. And that is regardless of who impedes upon it. And I made very clear my opposition to the decisions made by NYU Langone. I will continue to make that clear as the mayor of our city. And I am frankly looking forward to working with our new director on seeing the many ways our city can stand up for queer and trans New Yorkers.  

That's nice, though it is nothing specific. Such replies warrant follow-up. It annoys me when none come. 

The new office, specifically, would be the direct avenue to address it. The leader sounds like a great choice:

Taylor Brown — who is currently working in the state Attorney General’s office in its civil rights bureau, and assisted in a lawsuit launched against Nassau County and its ban on transgender women and girls from playing sports in county facilities — will head the new office. She will be the highest-ranking trans person in New York City government.

Brown also worked for Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and the American Civil Liberties Union, where she was a part of the legal team behind a landmark lawsuit for trans people looking to amend birth certificates in West Virginia.

Change must come from below before it reaches the top. This office is what people voted for. What I voted for. 

As Out Magazine noted:

The historic move not only marks an institutional shift for the city but also highlights Mamdani's commitment to the LGBTQ+ community. This draws a stark contrast with other Democrats at a time when the Democratic Party is being urged to "do more" for queer people.

Good luck and godspeed. 

Some Books

I have had mixed experiences with books recently. I have had better luck lately. A variety of books with different subject matters are worth noting. 

Walter Isaacson’s new book, “The Greatest Sentence Ever Written,” takes as its focal point the document’s second line: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

An apt entry for the 250th anniversary of our independence. The book is tiny -- it is around sixty-four pages -- and half of it isn't even directly about the sentence. He includes an essay about the importance of supporting the common good. He also includes multiple documents, including a first draft.

I also liked Edward Larson's, best known for his book on the Scopes Trial, book on 1776 overall. 

I found this author because she has a new book. This is an older one that was at the library. The "Jenna" book club references Bush43's daughter. 

It covers the life of its character from 7-18 (for whatever reason, the plot ends about a decade before the book was published) or thereabouts. It is not a young adult book, but it reads like one. It is in her voice. 

Her father is unreliable, her mother is trying to survive with two children from different fathers, and Sam likes to climb. We get some plot from when she is younger, but a chunk takes place when she is around 15-18. 

I liked it overall, though it probably went too long. 

I found a picture of this book and the next one, which were read over fifteen years ago. I listened to this one (don't recall doing so) while reading it this time. 

I did listen to The Devil in the Junior League, which is a summer read that I put on the side panel (btw, one image appears to not show up on some browsers). A good performance -- appropriate Southern accent (though one person said it wasn't Texan ... I didn't notice the difference -- IITW took place in Texas btw) with a nice sound effect simulating phone calls and use of a microphone. Got a kick out of it -- sometimes, it doesn't take much to amuse me.

The author had a bunch of romance novels. This one was inspired by her own life (she moved to NYC from Texas). It was a fun story of a twenty-something whose comfortable life falls to the wayside, but she manages to find a way. 

One thing that originally attracted me to the book was that I watched a LGBTQ film (It's In the Water) that took place in a similar milieu. That is, a junior leaguer stepped outside of her comfort zone, this time accepting her lesbianism. 

Blechman’s forte clearly is in his character studies of these and other pigeon enthusiasts. His account of the historical pigeon, on the other hand, is a bit mottled by his lack of footnotes or bibliography. One can neither check up on details nor expand one’s knowledge. The engaged reader, of course, wants to do both.

The book covers various subjects (including Darwin, beauty contests, food, and target practice) but emphasizes pigeon racing. It is well written. Pigeon enthusiasts might want a bit more about the birds themselves. 

The bird racing was familiar. My dad raced birds. He fit the m.o., coming from a working-class ethnic background. We had a coop on the roof. 

He had one of those clocks that were used to track when birds arrived. I'm not sure how he started. For whatever reason, he eventually stopped. 

Midaq Alley (Arabic: زقاق المدق, romanized: Zuqāq al-Midaqq) is a 1947 novel by Egyptian author Naguib Mahfouz, first published in English in 1966. The story is about Midaq Alley in Khan el-Khalili, a teeming back street in Cairo which is presented as a microcosm of the world.

I found out about this book because it was adapted into a film (taking place in Mexico). The book is a tad risqué (involving homosexuality, prostitution, and other mature topics) with various human dramas taking place. Good translation. 

Mahfouz was a leading Egyptian novelist who repeatedly used "alleys" in his works. I don't read much fiction, especially "classic" novels. Overall, I enjoyed it, though now and then the exposition went on a bit too long. 

I never saw the film. 

Ted Danson, during his appearance on Stephen Colbert, recently referenced that he has a podcast. There are lots of podcasts out there. 

I checked it out. He has some interesting interviews. 

I listen to a few podcasts. I often get bored with podcasts. Strict Scrutiny Podcast, concerning the Supreme Court, which is a prime interest of mine, often goes too long. 

But I listened to both parts (about two hours total) of the interview he had with his wife. They met while doing a film together. They acknowledged the film didn't do well. 

The marriage did. It has been around thirty years. 

SCOTUS Watch

Order List

Sotomayor (with Jackson) dissented from a denial regarding a case about prisoners having the right to split a filing fee. Kagan would have taken the case but did not join. Takes four to grant cert. 

We then went into an oral argument involving guns and drugs. Eric Segall has a good commentary. And then the long oral argument was done. 

But not the news for the day. 

"Emergency" Docket

Steve Vladeck and Chris Geidner discussed two irregular decisions involving a New York City redistricting matter and requiring a school to tell parents their children were using alternative pronouns and so forth. They are the usual 6-3 jobs with Sotomayor and Kagan handling dissents. 

Rick Hasen briefly raises red flags about the New York case. The problem there is procedural. Only Alito writes for the conservatives. But he might have an opinion for the Court in an election case soon. That one will matter. 

The case page provides the state brief in the trans case, which details various complexities that some skip over since they think the policy is wrong. Erin Reed puts things into a wider context. She covers trans issues. And the SCOTUS conservatives have, over and over again, shown disdain for trans rights. 

(The exception being the Bostock case, a statutory interpretation case that is an asterisk without more.) 

Overall, Kagan is correct. First, they should have taken it for full review. Second, they are hypocrites regarding substantive due process, including not taking a case where trans parents raised such claims in support of their children's transitioning. 

Vladeck flags that the majority -- unsigned though Barrett with Roberts and Kavanaugh concur separately, with a few comments about Dobbs, the abortion case -- rushes through the balancing required in granting the request. 

Okay, they did it, as he says, but they did it slipshod, including not being concerned about the interests of the students. For instance, even if you think the parents have a good case, the district court's order appears to be too broad. 

Ideally, parents, children, and schools should be on the same page. But things are not always ideal. Forced outing, against the will of the children, is bad too. 

A 6-3 "emergency" docket opinion is not the way to handle this situation. But, as Vladeck says, the conservatives are (selectively) impatient. 

Billy Leon Kearse Execution

Florida, after SCOTUS dropped a no comment order, executed another person on Tuesday.

Kearse murdered a police officer about thirty-five years ago. Murdering a police officer is one of those narrow classes of cases of particular heinousness. But it was 35 years ago. Too long.

And, even there, only a narrow majority below rejected claims that a death sentence was improper. He was 18 and had serious intellectual disability claims. 

The final appeal raised procedural arguments, including those involving the disability, which were probably rightly rejected in this posture. Still, even here, I wish they would briefly explain the ruling.

I continue to find these executions gratuitous and otherwise problematic without being APPALLED each and every time. 

Opinions

Wednesday was a scheduled opinion day, though the two unscheduled rulings took some attention off that. Regularly, SCOTUS does things off schedule.

Jackson (standard used in an immigration case) and Sotomayor (NJ Transit Corporation is not an arm of New Jersey, so no sovereign immunity) with unanimous opinions. SCOTUSblog had a live blog.

Upcoming

Another Order List is scheduled for Monday. There will be a two-week break before more oral arguments. 

No opinion days are scheduled, but as we have seen, unexpected news might arise at any time. For instance, two years ago, the Supreme Court announced over the weekend that there would be an opinion dropped, without them showing up (cowards). 

The Supreme Court does not usually announce news on the weekend. But this was a special case. It was the Trump v. Anderson opinion keeping him on the ballot. 

Odds and Ends

SCOTUS is on its mid-winter break. 

It released its March argument schedule, which includes April 1 (birthright citizenship). See also, some of the anti-BC briefs.

==

Today's Groundhog's Day and this is Black History Month. I briefly talk about that here with further links with more info.

==

I watched Ted Lasso (first five episodes) on DVD around five years after most people. It does have charms, especially such a positive lead, which we need in these times. 

The two primary women (owner and girlfriend of a player) characters are well played. There are so many shows these days on so many platforms of which I see nearly none.  

Interesting book with four flawed individuals.

Someone responded to a post about an anniversary of the 18th Amendment with a "what a bunch of morons" sentiment. That's a somewhat cheap shot.