THE FURTHER CORRESPONDENCES OF MARC SUSSELMAN PART 34

********

17 July 2025

MS said:

Supreme Court Keeps Ruling in Trump’s Favor, but Doesn’t Say Why

"NYTimes..."

We know why – because three of the Justices whom Trump elevated to the Supreme Court are more interested in showing him their gratitude than obeying their oath to support the Constitution. The other three share his objective of dismantling the democratic state which FDR and the Warren Court established.

********

MS said:

With all the crazy stuff which is going on in Washington - cutting of funds to PBS; controversy over the Epstein file; arresting of people who look Hispanic; the Supreme Court approving whatever Trump wants - I feel like I am in the middle of a Sharknado movie.

********

19 July 2025

MS said:

"Colbert..."

Sad

********

22 July 2025

MS said:

"Colbert 2..."

Bravo!

********

MS said:

"Rogan..."

What thinkest thou?

But the Democrats already tried public finance reform, and got shut down by the Supreme Court.

********

23 July 2025

MS said:

Supreme Court Lets Trump Fire Consumer Product Safety Regulators

"NewYorkTimes..."

Is there nothing this Supreme Court will not allow Trump to do? Will they go so far as to say that he can even run for a third term?

What can prompt their total submission to him? It is as if they are in league with him with the objective of dismantling the liberal leaning government which the Democrats under FDR and LBJ constructed. It seems almost Mephistophelian.

********

MS said:

The attorney general briefed the president in May about the scope of what the DOJ found in its review of the Epstein case

Collins asks Gabbard if she's targeting Obama to be in good standing with Trump

"Collins..."

Leavitt, Bondi, Gabbard – a coven of witc###, with Trump as their warloc#.

********

25 July 2025

MS said:

Starvation in Gaza is a moral test for Zionists. We’re failing.

To deny Israel’s role in this humanitarian disaster is to defy the ideals behind the Jewish state

"Gaza..."

********

MS said:

President Trump was asked if he would pardon Ghislaine Maxwell.

"MaxwellPardon..."

Can there be any doubt?

The options:

Option 1:

Ms. Maxwell, in speaking with DOJ official Todd Blanche, reveals incriminating information about Trump, which Blanche reports back to Trump.

Does he pardon her, or commute her sentence, risking blowback from his base?

Of course he does, so that she develops a sudden case of amnesia.

Option 2:

Ms. Maxwell, in speaking with DOJ official Todd Blanche, does not reveal any incriminating information about Trump, which Blanche reports back to Trump.

Trump reasons: Either she knows nothing which incriminates me, or she is keeping silent.

Does he pardon her, or commute her sentence, risking blowback from his base?

Of course he does, to insure that her memory remains faulty.

********

31 July 2025

MS said:

Trump’s tariff deals are all baloney.

"OnTariffs..."

********

1 August 2025

MS said:

The man who paid $10 M to purchase a handbag – money which would have been better spent buying food and shelter for the poor and homeless.

"Auction..."

This is the epitome of immorality.

********

3 August 2025

MS said:

One of the most important cases I am currently handling is a lawsuit against the City of Hamtramck, Michigan, which, in June, 2023, passed a resolution which essentially prohibited displaying the Pride Flag from the City’s flagpoles. An important factor is that the Pride Flag had in fact been displayed in 2022 from one of the City’s flagpoles. After the resolution was passed, two members of the City’s Human Relations Commission who proceeded to display the Pride Flag from a City flagpole anyway, were terminated from the Commission and the Pride Flag was removed. It has not been displayed again since.

The lawsuit claims that the City’s resolution is unconstitutional because it violates freedom of speech under the 1st Amendment, because it violates the neutrality principle which govern the 1st Amendment, and violates the Establishment Clause, because there was ample evidence that the resolution was motivated by the religious beliefs of the City Council members, all of whom are Muslim, and by the religious beliefs of their constituents.

I thought the case, filed in federal court, was going to be a slam dunk. I had filed a motion for summary judgment, requesting a ruling that the resolution be held unconstitutional. The case had been assigned to a federal judge, who was known to be fairly liberal. To my surprise, he issued a decision denying the motion and ruling that after the resolution was passed, the flags being displayed from the flagpoles constituted what is referred to as “government speech.” Under the “government speech” doctrine, when the government itself speaks, it is not required to adhere to the neutrality principle – the government can say whatever it damn well pleases – with one exception, it may not violate the Establishment Clause. With respect to my argument that the evidence indicated that the City had in fact violated the Establishment Clause, the judge ruled that courts are not permitted to inquire into the motives of legislators, outside the language of the legislation itself. He also encouraged the City to file its own motion for summary judgment.

Well, last week the City did file its own motion for summary judgment, adopting the court’s position that the resolution converted the flags from private speech into government speech. I am in the process of writing a brief in response to the City’s motion. In my brief, I am relying heavily on the position regarding government speech which has been argued by a particular Supreme Court Justice, in several of his dissents, concurrences, and in a majority decision which this Justice wrote in a recent Supreme Court decision. 10 to 1, you cannot guess who that Supreme Court Justice is.

That Justice is Justice Alito, who in several of his opinions has expressed concern that the “government speech” doctrine is dangerous, and is being improperly used to suppress speech that the government does not like. I am not particularly a fan of Justice Alito, but on this subject I believe he is correct, and am citing his opinions in my brief. Law, as life and politics, generally, can make strange bedfellows.

Post-script:

Back in June, fully expecting the judge to issue a decision in my favor, for the first time in my life, I displayed a huge American flag in front of my house, and next to it, a huge Pride Flag. They are both still there, blowing in the wind.

********

MS said:

"Politics..."

I happen to like Sen. Booker’s hectoring and would welcome more of it. Is it, however, unhelpful in advancing the Democrats’ objectives?

What do you all think?

********

MS said:

"YouTube..."

When are we going to start getting mad as hell at Trump’s repeated violations of the Constitution, of his persistent disregard for human decency, for Israel’s use of restrictions on the distribution of food in Gaza causing famine, on Russia’s violations of Ukraine’s sovereignty and its continuous murder of Ukrainian civilians, of the humanitarian crisis in Sudan causing the deaths of thousands, of ….

When are we going to stop just watching the news, and do something about it? Or do we believe we are powerless to do anything about it? Well, silence, conformity, submission certainly will not do anything about it.

********

MS said:

An uplifting story in the midst of all the depressing nonsens.

"YouTube2..."

********

MS said:

"Booker..."

Bravo, Corey Booker!

(Plus, he is really tall – 6’ 3”)

P.S.:

I think that Harry Truman was a pretty good President and leader of the Democratic Party.

I always heard when I was growing up that he was short.

It turns out he was 5’ 9” tall, which used to be my height, and I thought was average (I am apparently shrinking with age, however).

********

MS said:

I recently purchased a copy of Framed – Astonishing True Stories Of Wrongful Convicions, by John Grisham and Jim McCloskey.

The book recounts 10 true accounts of how innocent people were wrongfully convicted of crimes they did not commit, and spent a substantial number of years in prison. The prosecutions took place in Virginia, Texas, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Missouri, but there is no reason to believe that similar miscarriages of justice have not occurred in every state. They recount actions of utter incompetence, dishonesty, and immorality on the part of police, prosecutors and judges which shatter any faith in our legal system. My own faith in the legal system was shattered long ago, three years after I graduated law school, when I was involved in the Vincent Chin murder, in which the judge, Wayne County judge Charles Kaufman, gave the murderers, who beat Vincent to death with a baseball bat, probation, and despite the earnest efforts of myself and another attorney in my office to remedy this gross miscarriage of justice, we failed.

I have attached one of those accounts from the book. You will find the gullibility of your average citizen, and what they will believe has been proved “beyond a reasonable doubt,” quite astounding. It explains how an idiot like Trump has been elected President.

I recommend reading the entire book, but you should make sure to have a bottle of whiskey nearby in order to settle your nerves.

********

4 August 2025

MS said:

"Ukraine..."

True grit – and luck.

********

5 August 2025

MS said:

"CNN..."

The rebellion Is starting.

********

6 August 2025

MS said:

The shooter is a soldier, law enforcement official says. They have been apprehended and the threat at the Georgia Army base is over.

Does the use of the plural pronoun suggest that the authorities believe that the shooter is nonbinary? If not, this is an example of the confusing, and misleading, use of plural pronouns to refer to single individuals. According to the reports, there was only one shooter.

********

10 August 2025

MS said:

Some jackass removed the two Harris-Walz signs from my front lawn.

I've reported it to the police.

********

12 August 2025

MS said:

Things Jews can learn from Jesus.

Jesus is reported in Mark 12:17 to have said:

And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him.

He is also reported in Matthew 6:24 to have said:

No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.

Are we, as Jews, supposed to render unto Netanyahu things that are Netanyahu’s, i.e., his political ambition, and to Hashem the things that belong to Hashem, i.e., the moral precepts of Judaism? And how can this be done without serving two diametrically opposed masters?

********

14 August 2025

MS said:

This video will make you sick.

"YouTube..."

********

MS said:

Federal agents in Trump's crime crackdown set up checkpoint in popular D.C. nightlife area

"NbcNews..."

This is just the beginning of Trump’s plan to militarize the entire nation, with federal military forces in every major Democratic city in the United States, with the ultimate objective of turning the U.S. into a totalitarian state.

********

18 August 2025

MS said:

"Letter..."

Could I have misjudged these people?

********

19 August 2025

MS said:

Why did the Texas Democrats return to Austin, giving the Republicans a quorum to pass their gerrymandering law, after pledging to stand fast and stay out of Texas?

Are there no politicians we can depend on to stand up to Trump?

********

The End.