Texas Dems elect ConservaDem Kendall Scudder as state party chairman

So, Texas Democrats have gone from finally getting Gilberto Hinojosa to walk the plank from the water-treading SS Texas Democrats Minnow to this, Scudder getting elected in a highly contested race? (Interesting the TDP uses instant-runoff voting; now, along with stopping your effort to keep Greens off the ballot, maybe support it in state races?)

ConservaDem Kendall Scudder is, and I first met him seven or eight years ago. Riding Beto Bob's coattails then promoting Matthew McConaughey to run for gov is proof of that. More proof? In 2022, Kendall, in the DMN interviewing him for his state senate primary, said both parties had moved too far from the center.

As for his plans?

He wants the party to pay attention to areas he says it has previously written off, like rural communities, and put a priority on Spanish-language communications.

Wrote off rural Democrats? Did you forget about Beto, or Beat-0, in Muleshoe, which also involved his being a general PanderBear?

The reality is that rural Democrats, as in county-level political organizations, have long written themselves off. Those that aren't totally moribund welcomed Beto in Muleshoe for a bit of recognition in turn for a bit of his low-level grifting. That's in counties that even have a county level organization. Many don't, and the state party admits this.

And, Scudder, you served on the state party executive committee. You know this.

One other thing on Scudder, per my ConservaDem link? He bragged on his podcast about having a concealed carry permit, even with living in the Metromess. And yes, I saw it as bragging.

That, in turn, ties back to my post Friday: "With Texas Democrats, who needs Texas Republicans," as one part of that was about a majority of Senate Dems voting to get even tougher on the death penalty. In the DMN interview, Scudder wasn't asked about the death penalty. However, one of the other four candidates in that same state Senate race, Charles Gearing, twice volunteered his opposition to the death penalty, under the same question, about criminal justice reform. Maybe the fact that one of Scudder's three (step)-parents worked for either a county jail or TDCJ, as a correctional officer, per his website campaigning to replace Hinojosa, indicates he might tilt toward frying people, even if that was the dad his mom divorced. This would probably tie to his concealed carry permit, too. As would his being a "volunteer in patrol" with the Dallas PD. A more righty junior Jim Schutze? Gack.

I've done plenty of teh Google and can't find his stance. In addition to all of the above, IMO, if he actually opposed the death penalty he would have volunteered that info somewhere. 

I also don't know his position on Zionism and Palestine.

One-third trollingly, two-thirds seriously, I rhetorically asked about this on Shitter Monday night. Non-rhetorically, I asked Texas Progressive Caucus on Hucksterman, and Texas Democrats on Shitter. The purpose there is to see if THEY know, more than to get the answers themselves, since I already indicated I think I know what they are.

And, 24 hours later, neither has answered me.

So, contra Michelle Davis at Lone Star Left, in my world, Kendall Scudder is NOT a "pergressuve." Well, he surely is on LGBTQAI (If we're doing alphabet soup, I'm adding "Incel") issues, but not likely other than that. 

But, Jim Hightower supported him, because he has know-how and can raise bucks. Careful, Jim, or you'll find yourself in the neighborhood of yellow stripes and dead armadillos.

I mean, sexual orientation issues and abortion are important. So is combating US imperialism (Russia-Ukraine and NATO) and Israeli imperialism. So is real action, not fake action, on climate change. (Remember, in 2022, Beto-Bob discovered the religion of "drill, baby, drill.")

Scudder DOES know about running for office. Huntsville city council, multiple times. State Senate. The new elected member slot on Dallas County Appraisal District. Now this, and I'm probably missing something. In short, he's a permacandidate. Will he use the party chairmanship to run for office again at some point?

The death penalty — the US isn't totally an outlier

First, off to those nice polite Canadians.

Canada doesn't actually have the death penalty. It got rid of it long ago. But, via David Moscrop at Substack? A majority of Canadians wish they had it.

In this year’s survey, just over half of Canadians (53 per cent, down five points since 2023) think the death penalty is “sometimes” appropriate. About one in four (26 per cent, up one point) say it is “never” appropriate, while 14 per cent (up five points) say it is “always” appropriate.

Interestingly, per the story, that's a marginal decline from 2020, but not a real decline:

Starting in 2020, Research Co. and Glacier Media have asked Canadians annually about their views on the death penalty for murder. Although our country eliminated this possibility in July 1976, we have consistently seen about half of Canadians voicing support for reinstating capital punishment.

Also interestingly, that 53 percent doesn't exactly match with:

Lest one thinks, from what Americans know of politics north of the border from south of the border, this isn't all Conservatives. 

Conservative voters in 2021 are more likely to endorse this course of action (69 per cent) than counterparts who voted for the Liberal Party (56 per cent) or the New Democratic Party (49 per cent).

I guess Greens don't count in Canadian polling any more than in US polling. (Canada has no real equivalent of the US Libertarian Party. In Europe, people who identify as libertarian there think that US L/libertarians are fucking nuts, and they're right.)

There's also one other point, that we'll get to in more detail in a minute.

The intriguing fluctuations on this question are related to ethnic origin. While 31 per cent of Canadians of European descent believe the death penalty is “never” appropriate, the proportions are lower among respondents whose origins are Indigenous (20 per cent), South Asian (15 per cent) and East Asian (10 per cent).

Really? Yes.

Japan is one of four democracies, or alleged ones, that still has the death penalty. Per Wiki, it's executed 98 people this century. Aside from the US, those other countries are Singapore (shock) and Taiwan. It's also still on the books in South Korea, but on hiatus there since 1998.

And, I don't think I need to spell out the ethnicity of those places.

Now, the 98 in Japan is far fewer than the 1,018 in the US this century. 

That then said, what prompted this is that Japan, in at least one case, has shown that it can be as egregious in prosecutorial misconduct in a murder trial as in the US.

Texas House committee to subpoena Roberson again

It's supposed to happen today, unless Kenny Boy Paxton stops blocking access to the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee having Robert Roberson talk to them in person about the state's junk science law, how it apparently has not been followed in his case and more.

The committee worries Paxton is stalling them out until a new year, a new Lege and a new committee.

Given that Kenny Boy went from saying "do a video" to "can't see him," of course we know he's stalling. And, re a new committee, we don't know how presumed new Speaker David Cook (not you, Dustin) will handle this, or what his take is on the junk science law. We do know that current chair Joe Moody is a Democrat.

We also, per the story of the committee's original subpoena and its legal playout, don't know how the three new members of the CCA stand on this issue.

Ken Paxton trying to cut off Robert Roberson completely

Kenny Boy's latest? Rather than telling it to accept video testimony rather than an in-person meeting, it's pushing the House Jurisprudence Committee to accept no testimony at all. Per that piece, it's "amazing" the selective memory Paxton has for the state's disciplinary rules of professional conduct.

Here's my writing about its initial subpoena intervention.

The Trib has a primer on Robert Roberson's case history.

Robert Roberson gets justice for now at least

When Texas state House Republicans are the people intervening to prevent a likely innocent man from being executed, it's a big deal.

And it is, not just for Roberson, but for junk science and justice issues in Texas, right as early voting starts.

The Texas Legislature's law on junk science in the criminal system is now 11 years old. It's clear that appeals courts have a spotty record in following the law, and that — shock me — the Court of Criminal Appeals' record is abysmal. Ditto for the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, not elected, but appointed by the gov, which means Strangeabbott, rather than his usual Jesuitical posturing in such cases, could appoint better board members.

(I find it "interesting" that, even with the elections angle on the CCA, Charles Kuffner at Off the Kuff has yet to write in depth on this. He did post a Law Dork link in this week's Progressives Roundup, which I edited out because I'm writing this and because Chris Geidner.) 

Speaking of the CCA, the Trib reminds us that three of the five judges who voted against Roberson, including the odious Sharon Keller, got primaried because of Ken Paxton, and lost. If one of their three replacements flips, we have a different story.

And, the House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence has apparently had it. Besides subpoenaing Roberson to block his execution, which worked, it has indicated it plans next year to amend the 2013 law to put more teeth into it.

One suggestion? Subpoena current CCA and Board of Pardons and Paroles members while you're at it.

That didn't happen, and because the Hail Mary worked for now, Roberson didn't speak yesterday. But, wingnut lite Phil McGraw and John Grisham did. 

Why wasn't Roberson there himself? Because AG Kenny Boy Paxton, of course:

Paxton said over the weekend it was too dangerous to bring the death row inmate to the Capitol. Instead, Paxton said he would have to testify via Zoom. 

In a letter to the House committee Saturday, Roberson’s attorney Gretchen Sween said Roberson wouldn’t be able to communicate effectively over video because he is autistic and is unfamiliar with modern technology, having been in prison for more than 20 years. 

The committee agreed with Sween and was working on an arrangement to have Roberson appear at a later date, according to committee chair Joe Moody, D-El Paso 

“That doesn't mean Robert won't testify at all,” Moody said. “In the spirit of cooperation, we are in talks with the attorney general's office right now about ways their position can be addressed while allowing our committee to hear Robert in person.”

What a shithead. But, I'm not shocked and I hope you're not, either. Disgusted is fine. And, if Kenny Boy tells you "no," Joe? Do you all go to his prison cell?? And if TDCJ Executive Director Brian Collier says you can't all do that at once??

As for the state constitutional issue? From the same story link immediately above, this:

In his comments ahead of the hearing, Rep. Brian Harrison, a North Texas Republican, said the House committee is well within its rights to subpoena Roberson and conduct a hearing. 

“If the House of Representatives cannot exercise legislative oversight to make sure that our laws are not just being faithfully adhered to, but that they are not potentially being so egregiously violated that it may result in the life of a potentially innocent person being taken by the government, then I would posit there may be no matter that could be subject to legitimate legislative oversight,” he said.

That district court hearing is going to be fun as hell.

Speaking of that board, Pardons and Paroles? The man who appoints its members, Gov. Strangeabbott, has broken last week's silence for the explicit purpose of excoriating the House committee. Abbott used the vehicle of an amicus brief in the case now back in the Travis district court where it began. And, the amicus was ONLY about the separation of powers issue, saying the committee "stepped out of line."

Meanwhile, per the "reminds" link, it takes 90 days after a prosecutor's request for the state to set a new execution date for Roberson. The state Supreme Court's remand to the trial court to address the constitutional issues will have played out by then, as will the election, and if we go the full 90 days, so will the seating of the new judges and the new legislature. More here, including a note that a month ago, the CCA had one "flipper" in its current numbers, and overturned the life sentence of a DeSoto man on shaken baby issues. Beyond that, per the court case? Let us note that the subpoena stands valid, as of now, through the end of the 2025 legislative season.

The Observer, before Roberson's reprieve, also weighed in on the current CCA elections and primarying, but added a look at Keller and how her two decades as presiding judge framed today's CCA.

What is shaken baby syndrome and is it misused? In this piece, the Trib notes that the doctor who originated the idea has largely disavowed it, even while the American Academy of Pediatrics has not only dug in, but expanded its version of the definition.

==

Interestingly, the new-look, paywalled Texas Monthly has no reporting of its own, but just copies Trib stories.

Texas Progressives talk polls and races, plus abortion and death penalty

Off the Kuff published an interview with a co-founder of the Amarillo Reproductive Freedom Alliance, to discuss their fight against an abortion travel ban in that city. 

SocraticGadlfy had fun trolling Mark Robinson (and selected bycatch) on Twitter.

Colin Allred is ahead of Cancun Ted Cruz in one poll; and a debate is set for Oct. 15. I won't be voting for either, but getcha popcorn. Related? Allred, in an interview with the Monthly, doubles down on being a ConservaDem.

Multiple Texas House Rethuglicans have already thrown their hat in the ring. But, they've now "suspended" those hats after 48 members of the House GOP said they unanimously — after multiple rounds of voting — back David Cook to replace Dade "Dade" Phelan as speaker. Per LBJ, 48 ain't 76. And, if Phelan gets all Democrap members (assuming they're still a minority) will the Texas state GOP really expel half a dozen House members from the party for violating a House GOP caucus rule?

That said, a bipartisan group of House members officially urged clemency for Robert Roberson.  The Observer has a lot more background than the Trib. The Barbed Wire also jumps in.

There's a shit-ton of hydrogen sulfide leaking from older wells at the north end of the Eagle Ford area and further north.

As of late latest week, the State Fair's gun ban was still in place.

The Amarillo Reproductive Freedom Alliance folks had a guest post on Jessica Valente's Substack about their fight. 

Tony Blinken, genocide blank-check cutter. 

Remember, the "most lethal military" that a Black woman wants the US to have as president already badly affects indigenous people around the world.

The Texas Observer has a deep dive into Ken and Angela Paxton's "ties to a jet-setting lobbyist-turned-CEO caught in a tangled web of alleged fraud involving a powerful business clan and a commercial shipping giant". 

 The Dallas Observer talks to some of the men in Texas who are speaking out about the need for reproductive freedom. 

The Current ponders the future of a San Antonio architectural icon.

Neil at the Houston Democracy Project said it’s important for active rank & file Democrats doing the work to sustain the party, to consider that the elected officials they are backing often have different objectives than they do.

Abortion sanctuary city lies by Mark Lee Dickson et al

These lies by any fundagelical Protestant Christian, or Catholic or Orthodox equivalent, done willfully and knowingly (and yes, they're knowingly) are a violation of the Eighth Commandment.

AND, this is more egregious since Mark Lee Dickson is a Protestant pastor of whatever damnation, or non-damnational independent church he has.

Let's dive in with the lies that Dickson presents at a typical small-town governmental meeting.

First, he claims Biden administration supports abortion any time, any reason. 

Lie: Majority of national elected Democrats, including Biden when in the Senate, supported the Hyde Amendment. In addition,  presidents have repeatedly taken a pass on codifying Roe. 

Claim: “Biden Administration committed to abortion access in every zip code.” 

Lie: See above. 

Then he'll likely mention George Soros. 

Lie: Soros has never indicated abortion is a primary focus. 

Dickson will then claim the power of these ordinances could cross state lines, that an abortion provider in Kansas or New Mexico would be afraid of Texas lawsuits. 

Doubt it. Look at the folks in Washington state telling Paxton to go fuck himself on transgender and transsexual treatment records. And, a Texas district court upheld. (Some state appellate court could overturn, yes.) And, on New Mexico, we're still waiting for the state Supreme Court to rule whether or not the state can outlaw local sanctuary city ordinances. They're sure taking their sweet time.

Not a lie, but a reference to a liar?

Dickson claims Abby Johnson among supporters.

Fact: Nutbar alert! And a liar herself. And, like most such liars, a big old grifter off of it too.

The big lie is either actual misinformation or misframing of what these people say about human reproductive biology.

A canard, rather than a straight-up lie, is the suits against transportation of fetal remains. Did not the Texas Lege pass, and Abbott sign, a bill requiring burial of fetal remains inside Tex-ass? Shouldn't the concerned pro-lifers want other fetal remains to get a burial, too?

And, the biggest lie of all is the self-brainwashing behind this.

Beyond all this? 

What I would ultimately like to see is what it was talked about some librul states might do after SB8 was passed. Gun control was mentioned, but it would be hard to do a lawsuit enforcement on that.

What would not be so hard to do is, in an anti-death penalty state, allow citizens to sue over:

• any chemical used in lethal injections being transported through the state;
• any citizen of that state driving to a state execution in another state, or a citizen of another state driving through that state for one;
• any steel, concrete, etc., for a lethal injection room being created in that state or transported through it;
• and anything else like that which I am missing.

Mark Lee Dixon isn't a Catholic, but the residents and civic leaders of Catholic-heavy small towns are. And, I know what the Church teaches about the death penalty, and I know there's a lot of conservative cafeteria Catholics out there. Run into them, high hypocrisy levels and all, on Twitter.

==

Per the Trib, the pair has also meddled in New Mexico. The New Mexico Supreme Court temporarily blocked such laws when it got the case last December but has yet to issue a permanent ruling. 

Also per the Trib, the city of Clarendon told him to go fuck off.

Meanwhile, his co-thug, Jonathan Mitchell, has scared people, on issues related to this, but the former state solicitor general has yet to garner a single deposition.

And, per Mimi Swartz at the Monthly, there's payment shenanigans between Mitchell and Dickson on fees for a lawsuit he won for Dickson. Bottom line is it looks like Dickson is doing the moral equivalent of money laundering.

==

Amarillo has continued to punt, though may consider it again June 11. The constitutionally untenable travel ban is why. And, it officially said no on June 11; Mark's Minions are now trying to decide whether to gather signatures for a referendum.

Texas Progressives talk death penalty, gambling, more

Various environmental groups called on the feds to investigate TCEQ over water quality issues, and the EPA says an informal review is underway.

Living in a major wind farm area, it's easy to think that Chapter 313 was a big boon to that industry. Truth? It was a much bigger boon to the awl bidness.

"Latinx" is a bad enough, #woke in the bad sense, academia-driven neologism. I just threw up in my mouth over "Chicanx," Texas Observer. I stopped reading and your link gets a no-follow. (Among actual politicians who hate "Latinx" is Arizona Congresscritter and possible Senate candidate Ruben Gallego.)

Tex-ass has lethal injection drugs that have gone past their expiration date but still wants to use them. State lawyers for the Department of Criminal Justice have been shady in supporting this issue, but — shock me — the Court of Criminal Appeals has sided with them so far.

Speaking of death, James Harry Reyos, convicted of murder 40 years ago, may finally get his rightful due in court.

SocraticGadfly, from up on the Red, for various reasons doubts the Lege will give people casinos or even a casino constitutional amendment vote. 

Off the Kuff took a look at the varying results in judicial races in Harris County in 2022.

After a short break, Stace returns with a spotlight on a couple of campaign announcements that give him some hope. 

Texas 2036 wants to modernize our state's child welfare system.  

Jef Rouner wonders why some people defend celebrities with such vigor.  

James Revels looks at the plague of police brutality through the lens of Black History Month. 

 Amanda Marcotte digs into the reasons why Republicans keep doubling down on anti-abortion rhetoric and strategy.  

Houston Landing announced itself as a new non-profit news source.

The duopoly, lesser evilism and the Supreme Court

Last month, when Bernie Sanders was on the verge of dropping out, but hadn't yet, "Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill" started trending on Twitter, and I knew why.

Anybody who remembers Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Joe Biden's cave-in to committee Republicans remembers.

Of course, many a Democrat was ready to counter with "Oh the SCOTUS," Clarence Thomas being enabled aside.

The reality, as Tweeted in a thread? Just as Democratic presidents have been "lesser evilism" compared to Republicans, so, too have their Supreme Court appointments. Democratic appointments, including Antonin Scalia lover Ruth Bader Ginsburg, aka "The Notorious RGB," have had various degrees of lack of enthusiasm for the First, Fourth and Sixth Amendments.

(Insert: After I first got this done, but before it hit its publish date, as I had other more time sensitive stuff in the hopper, Justice Kagan gave more more ammunition. She hated on criminals in the Ramos case, voting with Alito and Roberts to still allow non-unanimous criminal jury verdicts.)

Let’s refresh ourselves.

The First Amendment. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Our fundamental “speech acts,” worship — and freedom FROM worship for we secularists — freedom of the press (though misinterpreted by the media at times as a license to stand above the general public), freedom to strike (though severely curtailed by the feds), protest, boycott and many other things, and finally, to ask our gummint to fix things, and tell them to fuck off in the process.

The Fourth Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. 

A biggie in today’s world, of the Internet, electronic surveillance and GPS systems. Governments at all levels and private businesses both abuse it. (Suits against businesses have rarely been tested, and the courts, unless something is truly egregious, usually grant even more carte blanche here than to government officials.)

The Sixth Amendment:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

This is perhaps less assaulted than the Fourth, but it’s still assaulted. Let’s dig in.

I last visited this issue in a general way when Tony the Pony Kennedy retired. The one handclap lauding of him made it clear that Democrat-type liberals appreciated him on gay rights and were glad he did not go further right than a middle ground breach on abortion. They didn't care about First Amendment nuances, like the muddled and awful but not horrible Town of Greece decision Kennedy foisted on us, because the New York or San Francisco city councils never have invocatioms. Worse yet, they ignore that Obama's DOJ filed an amicus, not on behalf of Galloway, but on the behalf of Town of Greece. Why? Dem-type liberals generally aren't irreligious. Worse, they halfway believe in the Christian nation mythos, as long as it's baptized into the civic religion that Scalia and Rehnquist, especially, liked to cite.

This guzzling of the civic religion Kool-Aid has been done the most Clinton squish Stephen Breyer and Obama squish Elena Kagan. Their being Jewish, to be honest, may be a factor. They may think the "Judeo fig leaf" half of the "Judeo-Christian tradition" is necessary to uphold, under the guise of civic religion, for Jewish protection. Or maybe not. In whatever case, they were wrong.

And more wrong when they indulged warmongering by connecting Christian crosses and military burials with evading the First Amendkment. Their ruling on American Legion vs American Humanist Association, commonly known as Bladensburg Cross, was godawful, pun intended. And, contra Hemant Mehta, Breyer's old Van Orton ruling which he used as precedent was almost as godawful.

Breyer, pulled out as a separate link from one of my blog posts, earlier hated the First Amendment's free speech protections whenever a cop might get butt-hurt you were exercising your free speech against him.

Wise Latina Sonia Sotomayor? Before nomination, on the appellate bench? A squish on Freedom of Information Act requests (First), churches freedom from labor laws (First) and minors' free speech rights (First).

Sotomayor, since getting on the court, has joined Breyer in being a Fourth Amendment squish.

Notorious RGB? Not come up in court cases, but Kaepernick-hater Ginsburg is a personal squish on symbolic speech acts such as flag burning. As a Hillz friend, this isn't surprising. Pulled from that blog post, The Nation talks about her as a squish in general. Hypocrisy alert, though. The Nation will never say a word outside the duopoly because it never has before.

Before that, ALL justices were squishes against the freedom of assembly clause of the First Amendment (told you it gets disrespected) when they ruled that Shrub Bush's Secret Service (a practice followed when allegedly protecting candidate Obama, then by President Obama) was OK in creating "cattle pens" of protestors way, way away from the president. Having been at multiple Bush protests, and in Denver the day before the start of the 2008 Democratic National Convention, I've seen this stuff firsthand.

Related? ALL justices have been Voting Rights Act squishes whenever the issue of voting rights isn't ethnic minorities but third parties.

Pre-SCOTUS, Elena Kagan was a political squish on drug laws, namely the Slickster's crack vs powder cocaine punishment difference.

Before this time, back in the 1990s, Slick Willie appointees Ginsburg and Breyer both voted to uphold capital punishment, restric habeas corpus, and even to allow Boston's St. Pat's parade, which was not church-organized, to ban gay groups. That one, even with less enlightenment nationally on gay rights 25 years ago, was disgusting enough then. Today? It's totally repulsive, and it's also totally repulsive that, when Tony the Pony was still on the court, nobody ever found occasion to overturn it.

Hell, within his own race to some extent, Thurgood Marshall was a Fourth Amendment squish. The Terry case is the blackest mark on his record. The case's language is full of loopholes that subsequent local, state and federal law enforcement have driven Mack Trucks through. True, it passed 8-1, or 6-1-1-1 if one wants to count concurrences by White and Harlin (both joined the main ruling as well). But Marshall, as an African-American, by joining the opinion without even a concurrence to nuance it.

The big takeaway, setting aside the Marshall footnote? Democratic Justices care little more about criminal rights, by and large, than Republican ones. They care no more about third-party voting rights. (Besides the link I offered, the fact that SCOTUS has consistently allowed, even required, state government elections officials to act as tools of the duopoly parties has shown this antipathy to run deep.) And, Democratic justices care not a lot more about expansion of executive branch powers than Republican ones.

==

Underscoring this, with the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, is SCOTUS' ongoing refusal to deal with the legal doctrine of qualified immunity, which has let many killer cops avoid even going to trial. Remember, it only takes four judges to grant cert. So, unless four librulz were highly worried that they'd spoil future cases on qualified immunity by granting cert to a less than perfect case, they're full of shit.

As USA Today explains, qualified immunity as a legal doctrine didn't exist until 1982. The court then had two definite liberals, Marshall and Bill Brennan. Harry Blackmun had by that time become a moderate liberal. Stevens was a moderate conservative. (He later became a moderate but never was a liberal, myth aside.) Powell and White were all definite conservatives, but not Rehnquist-type wingnut. Burger was a pompous conservative squish.  O'Connor was new, a conservative, but not Rehnquist.

Know what the vote was in Harlow v. Fitzgerald, the 1982 determinative case? 8-1. Burger the one dissent. Marshall among those supporting qualified immunity, as was Brennan. In Pierson v. Ray, both also signed off on the precursor to today's qualified immunity; Bill Douglas the only no vote there.

Per Wiki's page on qualified immunity, the eight justices, many of whom would go on two years later to bend backward for cops on the first phases of good-faith exceptions to the exclusionary rule, now said it would be unfair for them and others to go on trial to distinguish a state of mind when they were acting.  Wiki's page is good at bottom in noting an attorney defending a killer cop will always claim there isn't an EXACT precedent, and that qualified immunity has no obvious root in common law.

TX Progressives tackle various sellouts

The Texas Progressive Alliance knows that weekly blog roundups are not a crime. But, orphaning kids, or engaging in racial, classist, or environmentalist sellouts, and other things, certainly are. Dig in to this week’s roundup.

Texas Monthly discusses how federal judge Dana Sabraw said the Trump Administrastion may be creating permanent orphans from family-separated kids.

At the Dallas Observer, Jim Schutze says that Dwaine Caraway’s bid for mayor is probably dead in the water if a corruption lawsuit has any meat. Given that it’s connected to Dallas County Schools, it probably has plenty of meat. (Update, Aug. 9: It and Caraway are both dead in the water; he has now
pled guilty to two federal charges and resigned, the Observer reports.) I have a bit of personal familiarity with Dallas County Schools from it having a bus barn in Lancaster.

SocraticGadfly wonders why 25 House Dems and a Gang Greenish environmentalist group are recycling an old Ryan Zinke idea for new National Parks funding.

Brains and Eggs notes that just when you think national Democrats can’t do worse on 2020 prez candidates, up pops Eric Holder, even as alleged progressives of the Kossack tribe at Netroots Nation let their ballot boxes be stuffed for Terry McAwful, I mean, Terry McAuliffe.

Texas Standard wonders if Pope Francis’ now-total opposition to the death penalty will sway any Texas Catholics, like, you know, Gov. Greg Abbott. (Answer? No. It will just make Rethug Cafeteria Catholics a larger tribe than Doink ones.)

Texas Rural Voices talks about how arming Texas teachers will be dangerous.

Chris Ferguson wonders why some people are afraid to call themselves "feminists".

Very Smart Brothas calls out Dallas Cowboys QB Dak Prescott for his sellout to Jethro Jerry Jones.

Related? Dallas Observer’s Stephen Young reviews Very Smart Brothas calls out Dallas Cowboys QB Dak Prescott for his Dale Hansen’s interview with the WaPost over Jethro Jerry’s “no kneeling” stance.

Off the Kuff analyzed the latest polls in the Senate race.

Keep Austin Wonky looks at the end of CodeNext.

Therese Odell really doesn't like where Trump's war on the press is going.

The TSTA Blog ties everything back to the $5.4 billion cut to public education in 2011.

The Militant talks about the screening of “Santos Vive,” a documentary about how a Dallas cop  killed 12-year-old Santos Rodriguez by Russian roulette in 1973.

 Jade Esteban Estrada profiles State Rep. Ina Minjarez.

 Expat Texan Elise Hu bids farewell to Korea.

David Bruce Collins discusses a bit of mental health.

TX Progressives talk Trump, death penalty, pollution

The Texas Progressive Alliance is old enough to remember a time when Republicans thought cozying up to Russia was a bad idea (your blogger will have an updated report on the "12 Russians" indictments and the Trump-Putin summit next week) as it brings you this week's roundup — and as one member celebrates the Cardinals firingMike Matheny.

Off the Kuff reviewed the prognosticator projections for Texas' Congressional races.

SocraticGadfly talked about how the latest animal research seems to partially refute some ideas of Elizabeth Loftus' claims about how memory can operate.

Neil at You Need To Act Right Now detailed steps he was taking to defeat Trump and Trump's wickedness. Everything we do in this regard has value.

The NAACP had its annual convention in San Antonio and talked about getting out the black vote and continuing to fight disenfranchisement laws.

State Rep. Joe Moody calls for the abolition of the death penalty in Texas.

The Texas Trib notes how Greg Abbott is building on Rick Perry in consolidating trhe governor’s power.

State Rep. Joe Moody calls for the abolition of the death penalty in Texas.

Sanford Nowlin frets about the state of local media in San Antonio, though his worries apply to most metropolitan areas.

Stephen Young at the Dallas Observer describes the politics behind why Texas is likely to continue to oppose Medicaid expansion. The Texas Observer notes that, for similar reasons, automatic voter registration, ie, "motor voter," same-day registration and other ideas, won't happen.

Erica Schommer decries the planned reopening of the Willacy County Detention Center.

Equality Texas responds to the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

Greensource DFW says bacteria could decompose those nasty paper bags — and produce electricity in the process.

Downwinders at Risk stumbles on an old clean air fund and asks questions about it while suggesting it could be repurposed.

Backstory — your blogger was in Lancaster at the time, and trongly supported the coalition’s work to block coal-fired power plants. He does remember, and notes, that Cedar Hill and Duncanville refused to join Lancaster and DeSoto among Best Southwest cities. Back to you, Rob Franke.

More on the problems of the death penalty

I can agree with at least some small-l libertarians on social issues, on occasion, outside the biggies of drug policy and sexual privacy/rights. Thomas Lucente has a good column here on what's wrong with the death penalty.

Here's my summary:

1. Eyewitness testimony is often fallible
2. Other testimony also involves jailhouse "snitches," who are definitely fallible
3. In states with elected prosecutors, especially "red" states, there's a "pander" motive to be tough
4. Ditto for states with elected judges.

At the same time, per the "cruel and unusual punishments" phrase of the U.S. Constitution, is life without parole in a federal Supermax much better? Maybe we should ask Leonard Peltier.

#Douthat and an immoral death penalty argument

Ross Douthat has gotten even stupider than David Brooks or Teapot Tommy Friedman and that's hard to believe. He says we should be glad we have the death penalty; otherwise, Troy Davis wouldn't have gotten all his appeals. NO, seriously:

After all, in a world without the death penalty, Davis probably wouldn’t have been retried or exonerated. His appeals would still have been denied, he would have spent the rest of his life in prison, and far fewer people would have known or cared about his fate.

 And it gets worse:

Simply throwing up our hands and eliminating executions entirely, by contrast, could prove to be a form of moral evasion — a way to console ourselves with the knowledge that no innocents are ever executed, even as more pervasive abuses go unchecked.

If Douthat is a "conservative intellectual," it shows how shallow that pool is. The rest of the column gets even worse.

Beyond my thoughts, a libertarian columnist, Thomas Lucente has a good take. He includes noting how elected prosecutors and judges will, for political reasons, have a pro-death penalty bias.

John Whitmire: Not a real Democrat

Not even by the often-loose standards of what one is, in Texas.

Now, because James Byrd Jr. killer Russell Lawrence Brewer ordered a humongous last meal, then didn't eat it before his execution, Whitmire's getting the "last meal" tradition ... er ... killed, pun intended.

And, as for people who found other requests offensive? Well, maybe that's the point. The offensiveness of the death penalty and how it's inflicted today.

Texas — we’re No. !

In
governmentally killing people, that is.

Starting next Tuesday, Texas will kill 10 people in 30 days.

No telling how many of them got shitty or even tainted trials.

Racial bias in death penalty sentences AND executions

Black murder of whites not only the most likely to get the death penalty; Hispanic odds also greater than white-on-white murders

It’s also the most likely to lead to execution. Here’s the details, from a new research study by David Jacobs, a sociologist at Ohio State University.

A black who killed a white person has twice the risk of being executed than a white person who killed a non-white, he said. “The fact that blacks who kill non-whites actually are less likely to be executed than blacks who kill whites shows there is a strong racial bias here,” Jacobs said. “Blacks are most likely to pay the ultimate price when their victims are white.”

Hispanics who killed whites were also more likely to be executed than were whites who killed non-whites, the study found. But the risk of execution was not as strong for Hispanics who killed whites as they were for blacks who killed whites.

The study also reinforced previous findings by Jacobs that the likelihood of a legal death penalty was greater in states with higher proportions of black residents, an ideologically more conservative population, and in states where there was greater support for Republican candidates.

In the new research, Jacobs found that execution probabilities increase in states along with the population of African Americans, up to a point. But when the population of blacks reaches about 16 percent of the population, executions start to decrease. Probably at that point, African-Americans have enough votes and political influence within a state to reduce the number of executions, Jacobs said.

One more piece of evidence that racial bias still exists in sentencing, above all in death penalty cases. One more reason to abolish it.