Author Archive: Glenn Reynolds

KANGAROO COURT:

Life imitates the Bee again:

REMEMBER THIS WHEN THEY PLAY THE “DECENCY” CARD:

I’M AFRAID THIS IS APT:

KIMBERLEY STRASSEL: A Flagging Campaign Against Justice Alito: The ‘ethics’ attack having failed, the left turns to flag etiquette.

Yeah, well, the left has been burning flags and putting them on the seat of their pants for my entire lifetime, so STFU about etiquette.

Plus:

It might seem that nothing could top such silliness, but never underestimate an obsessive. This week we are also told—in ominous tones—that Justice Alito in August 2023 sold a small holding of shares in Anheuser-Busch some four months after the company’s decision to broadcast its wokeness by forming a public partnership with a transgender social influencer. Investors had for months been fleeing a stock that was near bottom, so if anything, Justice Alito was behind the trend. Yet this act of portfolio management is now presented as proof that the justice supported an anti-transgender “boycott.”

Democratic politicians and activists are racing to translate these meritless stories into futile actions. Nearly 50 House Democrats on Tuesday signed a letter demanding Justice Alito recuse himself from any Jan. 6-related litigation and for Justice Thomas to join him because his wife works in politics. Tennessee Rep. Steve Cohen introduced a resolution of censure against Justice Alito, for not having already recused himself from Jan. 6 cases.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer suggested he may call for a vote on a Democratic bill that would dictate recusal standards for the justices—a challenge to the separation of powers. The activist group Demand Justice says it will spend “six figures” on ads calling on Justice Alito to recuse himself. The group began its effort on Tuesday by unimaginatively projecting an upside-down flag onto the Supreme Court building.

This desperation belies any claim that the left’s interest is in ethics at the high court. The nonstop attacks—week after week—are aimed at altering the outcome of high-profile cases currently in front of the court, including Donald Trump’s claim that presidential immunity shields him from criminal charges related to the Jan. 6 riot. If the activists could force a recusal or two, they might sway a decision. If they fail, as they almost certainly will, they will continue smearing the court and casting doubt on the legitimacy of its decisions, with the longer-term aim of enacting legislation to pack the court by adding new justices when the Democrats control the White House and Congress.

The left tries to destroy any institution it can’t control. Note that the weak link in this process is that it depends on uncritical press support. The press should be made uncomfortable when it does this. If the parties were reversed the left would go after them — individually — Alinsky-style.

OPEN THREAD: Monday came on a Tuesday this week.

IF TRUE, THAT SHOWS GOOD JUDGMENT: Entering Law Students Do Not Rely On The U.S. News Rankings In Choosing A Law School. “We compared changes in law school US News rankings to changes in prospective law student preferences the following year. Those variables should be strongly positively correlated. If a school’s US News ranking increases, prospective law students should prefer it more the following year, and if it decreases, they should prefer it less. But in fact, they were at best very weakly positively correlated, and often they are weakly negatively correlated. In other words, prospective law students appear to be largely indifferent to changes in a school’s US News ranking. This suggests that prospective law students are getting information about which law school to attend from someplace other than US News. And it also suggests that law schools can safely stop paying attention to the US News rankings, because their customers don’t care.”

PLAY STUPID GAMES, WIN STUPID PRIZES: California’s $25-an-Hour Minimum-Wage Boomerang: Gov. Newsom now says the law he signed last October would add to the state’s fiscal woes. He ignored warnings at the time.

Progressives in Sacramento rarely think twice before burdening businesses. But lo and behold, they are having second thoughts about California’s new $25-an-hour minimum wage for healthcare workers. Why? Because its burdensome budget costs are threatening liberal programs.

California’s Democratic Legislature is scrambling this week to delay the state’s higher healthcare minimum wage, which is scheduled to take effect on June 1. It’s not uncommon for politicians to reverse themselves, but California Gov. Gavin Newsom is walking back a law that he signed only last October. What’s changed?

The state’s budget deficit has ballooned to $45 billion. Mr. Newsom projects that the new healthcare minimum wage would cost the state $4 billion more a year owing to higher Medicaid costs and compensation for workers at state-owned facilities. Legislative analyses warned about these costs, but Mr. Newsom signed the law anyway.

Thus the minimum wage for healthcare workers is set to rise to between $18 and $23 an hour this Saturday, depending on the type and size of healthcare provider. California’s current minimum wage for all workers is $16 an hour. Nearly all workers at healthcare facilities including janitors will have to be paid at least $25 an hour by 2028.

Democrats shrugged when healthcare providers warned that the wage mandate could force cuts to patient services. Who cares if Californians wait longer before being seen at the ER? But now Democrats worry that the state’s higher health costs could force bigger government spending cuts. Oh no. Californians may have to wait even longer for their bullet train to nowhere.

Mr. Newsom is proposing to tie health worker minimum-wage increases to the state’s general fund revenue and to exempt state facilities. But once capital-gains revenue picks up again, California’s private healthcare providers will be stuck paying for the wage mandate, which they will ultimately pass on to patients. Far better to repeal the $25 wage minimum en toto.

As usual, Democrats don’t want to eat their own lousy cooking.

Well, would you?