Justice Jackson and the Knuckleheads

Justice Jackson and the Knuckleheads 

Justice Jackson and the Knuckleheads. Sounds like a rock and roll band. Well the newest justice made a knucklehead remark worthy of Sotomayor.

Justice Jackson said what? I had great hopes for Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. She had some decisions that strayed from those of Justice Sotomayor, who may be the least capable justice in memory. But not so in her decision in the case of the Maine legislator whose voting privileges were taken away due to her stance on males competing against females. Jackson and Sotomayor – but not Kagan – voted against the legislator. Since the legislator was barred from voting, her constituents were denied representation in the state legislature. Jackson said in her dissent that the legislator had “not asserted that there are any significant votes scheduled in the coming weeks or that there are any upcoming votes in which Libby’s participation would impact the outcome.” What! Huh? You mean that if you know your vote won’t win then it is ok to be barred from voting at all? If that were the case, then why did Jackson even vote on this case – and any other in which she were in the minority – no pun intended? Would Jackson also contend that any representatives representing say blacks could be denied voting on issues where there would be outvoted? This reasoning is bizarre to say the least and certainly does not bode well for future decisions made by this justice.

Do all the knuckleheads protesting the Israeli invasion of Palestine who are shouting “globalize the intifada” realize that they have just endorsed the murder of Jews, including the couple killed in from of the Jewish museum in Washington? 

Speaking of knuckleheads, the Senate just struck down California’s EV mandate, following the lead of the House. President Trump will sign it. I was amused by the news reports that the Senate vote was “bipartisan” in that a sole democrat – the new senator from Michigan – voted for it while all the rest voted against it. Bipartisan indeed. California was trying to ban gas powered vehicles by 2035. A foolish and impractical goal to be sure. But even more foolish were the eleven states that had adopted the California mandate. Every democrat representative and senator from those states should be defeated in their next election – although some of them have seats so safe that an AOC would be reelected. Mostly overlooked in the media coverage were two other votes, one revoking the waiver on heavy duty trucks and the one waiving the emissions standards for diesel trucks. 

In the beginning, Ford and General Motors were all for making the California mandate nationwide. Electric vehicles require fewer moving parts and less labor. Although the companies are losing billions on trying to produce both electric and internal combustion vehicles, if they only produced electric ones, the automobile manufactures could see increased profitability in the future. But the market reared its head and after the initial sales to the greenies and rejected the electric vehicles in volumes necessary for profitability. Sales even dipped in California. Now Ford and GM all of a sudden have religion. GM seemed to forget its earlier support of the mandate now saying “GM believes in customer choice, and we continue to focus on offering the best and broadest portfolio of vehicles on the market. GM has long supported one national standard and consistency in emissions regulations that are aligned with market realities.” Bull. The market reality is that GM projected that it would sell 400,000 EVs in 2024 and ended up selling only 111,432. Now the company is saying that “Emissions standards that are not aligned with market realities pose a serious threat to our business by undermining consumer choice and vehicle affordability.”

Ford which had been a leading cheerleader for the mandate also changed its tune. The company’s lobbyists sent Congress a letter partly stating “Allowing these gas vehicle bans (something never attempted before in the United States) to proceed will increase automobile prices and reduce vehicle choices for consumers across the country at precisely the same time they are adjusting to the marketplace shock of 25% tariffs on imported vehicles and auto parts.” Yet Ford was once all in. During Trump’s first term it denounced his relaxed EPA regulations. It partnered with the California Air Resources Board to come up with a plan to reduce greenhouse emissions. Ford was also the only automaker to commit to the requirements of the framework for the mandate on light-duty vehicles. So give me a break. I had posted earlier about a Ford not being in my future to their backing of the mandates and the Ford Foundation’s funding of causes that are totally completely woke.