Who Decides Who Decides is first and foremost a place for written analysis. That isn’t changing. Democracy discourse comes in many forms, however, and an occasional post consisting of recent clips seems like a reasonable compromise. Thus, for your Sunday night or Monday (pleasure? agony? torture?) here are several of this week’s segments with brief descriptions. If you don’t want to watch any of them, that’s great. If one or two catch your interest, or strike you as worth sharing with your family or friends, that’s great too. Elevating the discourse is the goal. Your comments are always welcome.
ABC News Live · with Diane Macedo
A California couple, a surrogate who gave birth in Texas, and a judge ordering life-saving care. Parentage is state law, and three states answer the question differently, so the order in which courts rule matters more than it should. Plus, Ken Paxton’s entry turns an already-difficult situation into a political drama.
Video link here
The Moment with Katy Tur · with Sam Stein, Yvonne Wingett Sanchez, and Scott MacFarlane
Ty Cobb gave Mehdi Hasan a startlingly candid answer, and Katy asked me to react. Three lame-duck Republicans confirmed Todd Blanche believing he was the one person who could rein the president in. They confirmed a man whose career argument is that Article II gives the president nearly unlimited control of the Justice Department.
I was also privileged to join Scott on Scott MacFarlane Reports for a quick discussion of the Blanche confirmation:
The Moment with Katy Tur · with Stu Stevens, Alex Wagner, and Jason Selvig
Roughly $2.2 billion in presidential ventures this year, and the conflict-of-interest statutes that would govern any other federal employee exempt the president. Stu Stevens, Mitt Romney’s chief strategist in 2012 and now a Lincoln Project adviser, suggested prosecution. Katy asked me whether that’s actually available.
Antonia Hylton on Money, Power, Politics
Beaten on the IEEPA tariffs, the administration switched to statutes Congress actually wrote. Beaten in Trump v. Cook, it gave Governor Cook the notice she was owed. Contestable, both, but they route through some authority other than the one the Court rejected. Birthright citizenship has no such route. What Stephen Miller and President Trump concocted is an affront to the Fourteenth Amendment, an affront to the Supreme Court, and an affront to the separation of powers as a whole.
Same segment, second half
Removals to countries where the deportee has no citizenship, no family, no connection. Antonia’s question here is a good deal more insightful than my answer to it.
ABC News Live · with Kyra Phillips and Elizabeth Schulze
Section 230 protects platforms from liability for what users post. It says nothing about how a product is designed, and that distinction is the entire case.
Link to above segment here
The Weekend · Maybe slightly disagreeing with George Conway? Or maybe not?
A Chicago grand jury subpoena touching the daughter of the judge who presided over the president’s New York criminal trial, and an attorney general calling the machinery that produced it an anti-weaponization project. Do George Conway and I disagree on the unitary executive? Unclear. We agree that Todd Blanche is wrong for the country and right for one man alone. George took it from there, with me in the role of boring, straight man, law prof.
I’m glad you’re here. I’m grateful you’re engaged. Here and everywhere. — James
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.