Dear ChatGPT: How do we know if what we see online is real?

1. Start with Healthy Skepticism

Ask yourself:
- Who created or shared this?
- Why would they post it?
- Does it seem designed to trigger strong emotions (anger, outrage, pride)?

Emotional manipulation is one of the biggest red flags for misinformation or coordinated disinformation.


2. Check the Source

- Verify the publisher: Look at the website domain and its “About” page. Legitimate outlets usually list editorial staff, contact information, and a mission statement.
- Cross-check elsewhere: If the story is true, other reputable sources (like AP, Reuters, BBC, or local verified outlets) should also report it.
- Watch for imposters: Fake sites often mimic real ones (e.g., “abcnews.com.co” instead of “abcnews.go.com”).


3. Inspect Images and Videos

- Visuals are often the most convincing — and the most easily faked.
- Reverse image search (via Google Images or TinEye) to see where the image first appeared.
- Video verification: Use tools like InVID or Amnesty YouTube DataViewer to check when a video was uploaded and if it’s been reused from another event.
- Look for AI-generated artifacts: Pay attention to warped text, inconsistent lighting, mismatched reflections, or unnatural facial features.

4. Check Dates and Context

Sometimes real images or stories are shared out of context — for example, an old photo presented as breaking news.

Look for:
- Dates on the article or post.
- Event details that can be checked (location, weather, people involved).

Time-sensitive language like “breaking,” “just happened,” or “urgent” — which might signal manipulation.


5. Consult Fact-Checking Organizations

Independent fact-checkers exist specifically to verify claims:
- Snopes
- PolitiFact
- Reuters Fact Check
- AP Fact Check
- AFP Fact Check

They often debunk viral misinformation within hours or days of it spreading.


6. Use Digital Verification Tools

Some free, reliable ones:
- Google Fact Check Explorer – searches across known fact-checks.
- Botometer – analyzes if a Twitter/X account might be automated.
- Whois Lookup – finds who registered a website and when.
- NewsGuard – browser extension rating website credibility.


7. Reflect Before You Share

Even if something feels true, pause before reposting. Ask:

- “Would I believe this if it didn’t confirm what I already think?”
- That moment of reflection can stop misinformation from spreading further.

The Secret Life of an Internet Troll

A few questions about online troll farms

All generated by ChatGPT

- What is an online troll farm?

- How pervasive are online trolls?

- How are online troll farms used to influence politics?

- Provide a list of prominent political trolling operations.

- How much does a professional troll farms charge for its services?

The Rise of Stalin: The Desk Job That Built a Dictator

Some helpful advice in case you want to take over the world. 

How do you do it?

Good idea?

 

This is another Zeal

 

From ChatGPT: What are political norms?

Political norms are the unwritten rules and expectations that guide how political actors—such as government officials, parties, and citizens—are supposed to behave within a political system.

While laws are formally written and enforceable, norms are informal but still powerful because they shape acceptable conduct and maintain stability in political institutions.


Key Characteristics of Political Norms:
- Unwritten: They are not part of formal legal codes.
- Shared Expectations: They reflect a common understanding of appropriate behavior.
- Enforced by Reputation and Pressure: Violating norms can lead to loss of trust, credibility, or political support.
- Evolve Over Time: Norms can change as political culture and society change.


Examples of Political Norms:
- Respect for election results: Politicians are expected to accept legitimate election outcomes.
- Peaceful transfer of power: Outgoing leaders peacefully hand over authority to incoming ones.
- Checks and balances: Leaders generally respect the independence of other branches of government.
- Civility and compromise: Lawmakers are expected to negotiate and cooperate across party lines.
- Avoiding misuse of power: Leaders avoid using state institutions (like courts or police) for personal or partisan gain.


Why Political Norms Matter:
- Political norms support democracy by promoting trust, fairness, and stability. When norms erode, even a system with strong written laws can experience polarization, corruption, or authoritarian behavior.


Some examples of how political norms have changed in recent U.S. politics or globally.


1. Judicial Appointments
- Traditional norm: Presidents consulted senators of both parties and avoided confirming Supreme Court justices close to an election.
-Change: In 2016, the Senate refused to consider President Obama’s nominee (Merrick Garland), citing the upcoming election—but confirmed Justice Amy Coney Barrett just days before the 2020 election.
Impact: Erosion of bipartisan cooperation and trust in the judicial appointment process.


2. Filibuster and Legislative Cooperation
- Traditional norm: Senators used the filibuster sparingly, mainly for issues of deep national significance.
- Change: The filibuster became a routine partisan weapon, blocking most major legislation.
Impact: Increased gridlock and decreased compromise in Congress.


3. Respect for Electoral Outcomes
- Traditional norm: Losing candidates conceded elections promptly and peacefully.
- Change: The refusal by some leaders to accept certified election results after the 2020 U.S. election challenged this norm.
Impact: Weakened public trust in elections and peaceful transfers of power.
4. Presidential Conduct


Traditional norm: Presidents avoided personal attacks on judges, the media, or law enforcement agencies.


Change: Recent presidents have frequently criticized these institutions publicly, questioning their legitimacy.
➡️ Impact: Undermined respect for independent institutions and norms of presidential restraint.

This is a Zeal

 

What is a bot farm?

From AI Overview: 

A bot farm is a large-scale operation that uses a network of automated internet bots to perform online tasks, which can be used for malicious purposes like spreading misinformation and fake reviews, or for more benign tasks like managing customer service. These farms manipulate online content and traffic to create artificial popularity or influence opinions, and they can be employed for advertising fraud, political propaganda, or to boost ratings on app stores and social media platforms.

Uses of bot farms

Spreading misinformation and propaganda: Bot farms, also called "troll farms," can be used by governments or organizations to spread political propaganda, attack critics, and manipulate public opinion, often influencing elections.

Click fraud and advertising manipulation: They can be used to artificially inflate the number of clicks or likes on advertisements, defrauding advertisers. For example, some advertisers claim a significant percentage of their ad clicks are fraudulent.

Artificial popularity and reviews: Bot farms can manipulate positions in online app stores, generate fake positive reviews, and increase fake "likes" or followers on social media to make a product or service seem more popular than it is.

Price scraping and automated trading: Some bots are used for legitimate purposes like automated trading or finding "bargains," but this can also be used for unfair competition.


How bot farms operate

Automated accounts: Bot farms control thousands of automated accounts that can mimic human activity.

Coordinated activity: These accounts often work in a coordinated manner to flood platforms with content, comments, or likes from multiple sources simultaneously.

Infrastructure: They require significant infrastructure, including a large number of devices, IP addresses, and software, to manage the vast number of fake accounts and their activities.


Examples

Russian "web brigades": An example of a coordinated state-sponsored effort that used fake accounts to spread pro-Russian content during the Russo-Ukrainian War.

Fake likes: A case where a company's product was found to have thousands of fake Facebook likes added by a "click farm".

Betting and trading bots: A betting exchange company, Betfair, saw a large volume of bot traffic and created an API for bots to interact with its system, acknowledging the role bots play in its market.

 https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/26/technology/cal-state-ai-amazon-openai.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Dear ChatGPT: What factors drive public opinion formation?

Public opinion formation is shaped by a combination of psychological, social, and informational factors.

Here are the main drivers:


1. Political Socialization

Definition: The lifelong process through which individuals acquire political beliefs and values.
Key Influences:
- Family: Often the strongest early influence.
- Schools: Teach civic knowledge and democratic values.
- Peers: Reinforce or challenge existing views.
- Religious institutions: Shape moral and social attitudes that influence political opinions.


2. Media Influence

- Agenda-setting: Media determines which issues are considered important.
- Framing: The way issues are presented affects how people interpret them.
- Priming: Media coverage influences which criteria people use to evaluate leaders or policies.
- Social media: Allows for rapid spread of information and misinformation, shaping perceptions.


3. Group Identity

- Race, ethnicity, gender, religion, and class all influence perspectives on policy and politics.
- People often align their opinions with the groups they identify with (known as group solidarity).


4. Partisanship and Ideology
- Party identification is one of the strongest predictors of opinions on political issues.
- Political ideology (liberal, conservative, etc.) provides a consistent framework for interpreting new information.


5. Political Leaders and Elites
- Public figures and opinion leaders (politicians, activists, commentators) shape views through persuasion and cue-giving — people take cues from trusted figures within their ideological camp.


6. Events and Experiences

- Major events — such as wars, economic crises, pandemics, or social movements — can rapidly reshape public opinion.
- Personal experiences with government (e.g., taxes, education, policing) can reinforce or challenge beliefs.


7. Education and Information

- Higher education levels are often linked to greater political awareness and more stable opinions.
- The quality and diversity of information sources affect how well citizens can evaluate political issues.


8. Cultural and Historical Context

- Long-standing cultural traditions, regional differences, and national history frame how issues are understood (for example, attitudes toward individualism, government authority, or freedom).

10.27.2025

- What is tyranny of the majority?

- What is a chronic minority?

- Brutus No. 1 (1787).

- Federalist 10.

- What solution does Federalist 10 offer for tyranny of the majority?

- What are the challenges to group formation?

Four nations with limited access to open waters

Compare these with the US

What is a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation?

Also known as a SLAPP Suit.

It is a common tactic for discouraging interest groups from participating in public debate.


From AI Overview:

A SLAPP, or Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, is a meritless lawsuit filed to intimidate and silence individuals or groups for speaking out on matters of public concern. The goal is not to win the lawsuit but to use expensive legal proceedings to drain the defendant's resources and deter them from further criticism.

How SLAPP suits work

- SLAPPs are effective because defending against a lawsuit, even a baseless one, can cost a defendant tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees. The threat of mounting costs can force critics to retract their statements or apologize to end the legal harassment.

Common targets of SLAPP suits include: Environmental and community activists protesting a real estate development.
- Journalists and bloggers who write critical articles.
- Individuals who post negative online reviews of a business.
- Concerned citizens who testify at a public hearing.
- Victims of domestic violence or sexual assault who speak out against their abusers.

The legal claims in a SLAPP are often disguised as legitimate civil actions, such as:
- Defamation (libel or slander)
- Invasion of privacy
- Tortious interference with contract or economic advantage

Anti-SLAPP laws
- To counteract SLAPPs and protect free speech, many U.S. states and countries have enacted anti-SLAPP laws. These statutes are designed to provide a legal defense that allows for the quick dismissal of meritless lawsuits.

While anti-SLAPP laws vary by jurisdiction, they generally provide the following protections:
- Expedited dismissal: The defendant can file a special motion to strike or dismiss the case early in the legal process, before expensive and time-consuming discovery begins.
- Burden of proof shift: After the defendant shows the lawsuit is related to protected speech, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to prove they have a legally sound case and will likely prevail at trial.
- Cost and fee recovery: If the defendant successfully gets the suit dismissed, many anti-SLAPP statutes mandate that the plaintiff pay the defendant's legal costs and attorney's fees. This provision serves as a strong financial deterrent against filing SLAPPs.
- Right of interlocutory appeal: Some states allow the defendant to immediately appeal a judge's denial of their anti-SLAPP motion, preventing the case from moving forward while the appeal is pending.

Limitations of anti-SLAPP laws
- No federal law: There is no federal anti-SLAPP law in the U.S., and federal circuit courts are divided on whether to apply a state's anti-SLAPP statute in federal court. This lack of uniformity can lead to forum shopping, where a SLAPP plaintiff chooses a federal venue that does not recognize state anti-SLAPP protections.
- State-by-state variation: Some state laws are much stronger than others. For example, some offer broad protections for all speech on a matter of public concern, while others only protect communications directed to a government body.
- Strategic complexity: Identifying a lawsuit as a SLAPP can be difficult. If a defendant incorrectly files an anti-SLAPP motion, they could be on the hook for the other side's legal fees. Legal counsel with specific anti-SLAPP experience is often necessary.

Links

- SLAPP suit.

- Strategic lawsuit against public participation.

- Understanding Anti-SLAPP laws.

- A Brief History of SLAPP Suits.

- SLAPP Suits: An Encroachment on Human Rights of a Global SLAPP Suits: An Encroachment on Human Rights of a Global Proportion and What Can Be Done About It Proportion and What Can Be Done About It. 

 https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/investigations/article/second-baptist-fellowship-church-ed-young-21079311.php

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/columnists/tomlinson/article/texas-ethics-campaign-donations-contractors-21112183.php

For 10.22.2025

- Texas Secretary of State.

- Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector & Voter Registrar.

- Harris County Clerk.

How WWI Changed America: Selling the War

What is propaganda? 

From AI Overview

Propaganda is the deliberate and systematic use of communication to manipulate public opinion, emotions, and behavior to support a particular cause, belief, or agenda. It often presents a biased or misleading viewpoint, using techniques like emotional appeals, name-calling, and distortion of facts to influence the audience. While propaganda can be used for many purposes, including commercial advertising, its use is often associated with political manipulation, as it can involve half-truths, rumors, or outright lies.

Key characteristics

Purposeful and systematic: It is a deliberate and planned attempt to shape perceptions and achieve a desired response.

Manipulative: It often relies on emotional appeals and psychological tactics to bypass critical thinking.

Biased viewpoint: It heavily emphasizes the benefits of one idea or group while downplaying or suppressing counter-arguments.

Information distortion: It may involve misrepresenting facts, using false statistics, or leaving out crucial information to create a specific impression.

Common techniques

Name-calling: Using derogatory terms to label opponents.

Appealing to emotions: Inciting fear, anger, or pride to sway public opinion.

Bandwagoning: Suggesting that a person should do something because "everyone else" is doing it.

Scare tactics: Frightening people into supporting a cause by warning of a dire outcome.

Simplification: Presenting complex issues in simple, often misleading terms.

U.S. and Texas Election Code

U.S. Election Code: 

- Title 52—Voting And Elections

- - Voting Rights
- - Voting Assistance and Election Administration
- - Federal Campaign Finance

Texas Election Code: 

- TITLE 1. INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS
- TITLE 2. VOTER QUALIFICATIONS AND REGISTRATION
- TITLE 3. ELECTION OFFICERS AND OBSERVERS
- TITLE 4. TIME AND PLACE OF ELECTIONS
- TITLE 5. ELECTION SUPPLIES
- TITLE 6. CONDUCT OF ELECTIONS
- TITLE 7. EARLY VOTING
- TITLE 8. VOTING SYSTEMS
- TITLE 9. CANDIDATES
- TITLE 10. POLITICAL PARTIES
- TITLE 11. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS
- TITLE 12. ELECTIONS TO FILL VACANCY IN OFFICE
- TITLE 13. RECOUNTS
- TITLE 14. ELECTION CONTESTS
- TITLE 15. REGULATING POLITICAL FUNDS AND CAMPAIGNS
- TITLE 16. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
- TITLE 17. LOCAL OPTION ELECTIONS

__________

Legislation contained in U.S. Code:

- Civil Rights Act of 1964
- Voting Rights Act of 1965
- National Voter Registration Act of 1993
- Voting Rights Language Assistance Act of 1992
- Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act
- Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act
- Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1979
- Overseas Citizens Voting Rights Act of 1975
- Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974
- Civil Rights Act of 1957
- Rehabilitation Act of 1973
- 21st Century Integrated Digital Experience Act
- Help America Vote Act of 2002
- Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act
- Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000
- Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971
- Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995
- Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002

Dear ChatGPT: What are the three faces of political parties?

Political scientists often describe three “faces” or components of political parties to explain how they operate in different arenas of political life. These are:


1 - Party in the Electorate

- This includes ordinary voters who identify with or regularly support a political party.
- It encompasses party members, activists, and loyal supporters who vote for the party’s candidates and promote its ideals.
- Example: Registered Democrats or Republicans who consistently vote for their party’s nominees.


2 - Party Organization

- This is the formal structure of the party—its national, state, and local committees and leaders who work to recruit candidates, raise funds, and run campaigns.
- It includes officials like the Democratic National Committee (DNC) or Republican National Committee (RNC), state party chairs, and precinct captains.
- They handle the day-to-day operations and long-term planning of the party.


3 - Party in Government

- This refers to elected and appointed officials who belong to the party and act together to achieve policy goals.
- It includes members of Congress, governors, presidents, and local officeholders who identify with the party label.
- They shape public policy and legislation according to party priorities.

In short:

- Party in the Electorate → Voters and supporters
- Party Organization → The machinery of the party
- Party in Government → Elected officials acting under the party label

California City, California

A layout of a city that was never fully built out. 

- Wikipedia entry.

The city was formed in 1958, when developers purchased 82,000 acres (33,000 ha), 128 square miles or 332 square km of western Mojave Desert. The new city was aggressively marketed. Developers pitched the city as a northern alternative to Los Angeles, which the developers argued could not handle the post-war population-boom, and the region needed other communities to share the increase. Instead of being built piecemeal, the whole city would be developed simultaneously. The city was designed to be a planned community. The masterplan was prepared by Smith and Williams and architect Garrett Eckbo at the behest of real estate developer and sociology professor Nat Mendelsohn. The city included a central park with a 26-acre (11 ha) manmade lake, two golf courses, and a new Holiday Inn. Mendelsohn was then president of a corporation called the California City Development Company. There were conflicting reports that the city was built over a large aquifer. The city was originally designed to accommodate 400,000 people, with a downtown center capable of holding 80,000–100,000, and satellite suburbs housing the rest.

Basic Facts About American Elections

From ChatGPT

- Provide basic facts about elections in the United States.

- Which governmental positions are elected in United States?

- Which governmental positions are elected in Texas?

- What is a single member district?

- What is proportional representation?

LRL: 2025 Texas Constitutional Amendments.

- Click here for it. 

Hanoi Hannah 'GI'

 https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/education/article/trustee-elections-november-2025-21037494.php

 https://houston.culturemap.com/news/city-life/grb-convention-expansion-council-vote/

Dear ChatGPT: Outline the argument in Federalist 78

Outline of the Argument in Federalist No. 78 (Alexander Hamilton):


1. Purpose of the Paper
- To explain and defend the structure and role of the federal judiciary under the proposed U.S. Constitution.
- To justify the need for judicial independence and life tenure for judges.


2. The Judiciary as the Weakest Branch
- The judiciary “has no influence over either the sword or the purse.”
- It controls neither force nor money, only judgment.
- Therefore, it is the least dangerous to political rights.
- Its independence ensures that it cannot threaten liberty as the executive or legislative branches might.


3. The Importance of Judicial Independence
- Judges must be independent to protect the Constitution and individual rights from legislative encroachments.
- Life tenure (during good behavior) encourages this independence by insulating judges from political pressure.
- A stable judiciary promotes consistency and impartiality in interpreting laws.


4. Role of the Courts: Guardians of the Constitution
- Courts are the interpreters of the law, including the Constitution, which represents the supreme law of the land.
- When a law passed by Congress conflicts with the Constitution, the Constitution must prevail.
- Thus, judges have the duty to invalidate unconstitutional laws—an early defense of judicial review.


5. Judicial Review and Popular Sovereignty
- Judicial review does not make judges superior to the legislature—it makes the Constitution superior to both.
- The people are sovereign, and the Constitution is their direct expression.
- Courts act as instruments to enforce the will of the people against potential abuses by their representatives.


6. Qualifications for Judges
- Judicial competence and integrity are essential.
- Life tenure attracts individuals with the necessary knowledge and moral character, who might otherwise avoid short-term or politically influenced positions.


7. Overall Conclusion
- The judiciary must be independent, permanent, and empowered to uphold the Constitution.
- Judicial review is essential to maintaining the rule of law and the balance of power among branches.

In summary: Federalist No. 78 argues that an independent judiciary, with life tenure and the power of judicial review, is vital to protect the Constitution and individual rights from legislative or executive overreach.

Dear ChatGPT: Is access to the courts a fundamental right?

- Click here for the full answer.


Yes — access to the courts is generally recognized as a fundamental right under the U.S. Constitution, though its scope depends on the context.

Here’s a breakdown:


1. Constitutional Basis

- Due Process Clause (5th and 14th Amendments): The Supreme Court has held that due process includes a meaningful opportunity to be heard in court before the government deprives a person of life, liberty, or property.
- Case: Boddie v. Connecticut (1971) — The Court ruled that denying indigent individuals access to divorce courts because they couldn’t pay filing fees violated due process. The state had monopolized the only lawful means of dissolving a marriage.

- Equal Protection Clause (14th Amendment):
Access to the courts cannot be denied or limited in a way that discriminates against certain groups (for example, poor defendants or prisoners) without sufficient justification.
- Case: Griffin v. Illinois (1956) — The Court held that the state must provide trial transcripts to indigent defendants appealing criminal convictions, recognizing that equal justice requires access to appellate review.


2. Criminal vs. Civil Contexts

- Criminal cases: 

Access to the courts is most robust. Defendants have rights to:
- Counsel (Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963)
- Public trial, confrontation, and appeal rights
- Court access even after conviction (e.g., habeas corpus petitions)

- Civil cases:

The right exists but is more limited. The government can impose filing fees or procedural requirements unless those barriers effectively deny justice in fundamental matters (e.g., family relations, access to basic legal remedies).


3. Prisoner Access

- Bounds v. Smith (1977): The Court held that prisoners have a constitutional right of access to the courts, which requires states to provide adequate legal assistance or law libraries.

- Later cases (Lewis v. Casey, 1996) narrowed this, requiring inmates to show actual injury—that lack of access hindered a nonfrivolous legal claim.


4. Overall Principle

- Access to the courts is a fundamental aspect of due process and the rule of law. The government cannot erect barriers that effectively prevent individuals from asserting or defending their legal rights.

- Would you like me to distinguish how fundamental this right is considered under strict scrutiny vs. rational basis review in constitutional analysis?

Dear ChatGPT: What are the arguments for and against an elected judiciary?

- Click here for the original response.

The question of whether judges should be elected or appointed is one of the oldest debates in American law and politics. Below is a balanced summary of the main arguments for and against an elected judiciary, including both normative (values-based) and practical (outcome-based) perspectives.

Arguments For an Elected Judiciary

1. Democratic Accountability
- Claim: Judges exercise significant power over citizens’ lives—interpreting laws, sentencing defendants, and ruling on constitutional rights.
- Rationale: Because they wield such power, the public should have a say in choosing them, just as it does for legislators and executives.
- Effect: Elections make judges accountable to the people rather than political elites or governors.

2. Legitimacy and Public Trust
- Claim: Elections can enhance the perceived legitimacy of the judiciary.
- Rationale: When judges are chosen by voters, citizens may be more likely to accept court decisions—even unpopular ones—because they trust the process that put those judges in power.

3. Checks on Elitism or Bias
- Claim: Appointment systems can concentrate judicial power in the hands of political or legal elites.
- Rationale: Elections open the process to broader participation, preventing a small group from dominating judicial appointments.

4. Representation and Diversity
- Claim: Elected judiciaries may be more representative of the public’s demographics and values.
- Example: In some states, elections have led to more racial, gender, or ideological diversity on the bench than appointed systems.

5. Responsiveness to Public Values
- Claim: Elected judges may align their decisions with prevailing community norms and expectations, especially in areas like sentencing or family law.
- Rationale: Courts remain connected to the evolving moral sense of the community.

Arguments Against an Elected Judiciary

1. Threat to Judicial Independence
- Claim: Judges are supposed to apply the law impartially, not based on popular opinion.
- Problem: Elections make judges dependent on voter approval and campaign donors, potentially influencing rulings to please constituents or interest groups.
- Example: Studies show elected judges hand down harsher criminal sentences during election years.

2. Politicization of Justice
- Claim: Elections turn judges into politicians.
- Rationale: Campaigns require slogans, fundraising, and party endorsements—practices that encourage ideological posturing instead of neutral interpretation of law.
- Effect: Undermines the image of the judiciary as nonpartisan and fair.

3. Campaign Financing and Corruption
- Claim: Judicial campaigns require money, often from lawyers and litigants who may later appear before those same judges.
- Effect: Raises ethical concerns about conflicts of interest and impartiality.
- Example: The Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. (2009) Supreme Court case found that excessive campaign contributions to a judge created a due process violation.

4. Voter Ignorance and Low Turnout
- Claim: Voters often know little about judicial candidates or the complex issues courts decide.
- Rationale: This leads to decisions based on party labels, name recognition, or ballot position rather than qualifications or philosophy.
- Example: Judicial races are typically low-information contests with low voter participation.

5. Inconsistency and Short-Term Thinking
- Claim: Elected judges might prioritize popular outcomes or short-term approval over consistent legal reasoning or precedent.
- Rationale: Fear of electoral backlash can discourage judges from making unpopular but legally sound decisions.

6. Unequal Access and Influence
- Claim: Well-funded or politically connected candidates dominate judicial elections.
- Rationale: This replicates inequality rather than correcting it—wealthy interests can effectively “buy” judicial influence.

From Wikipedia: The Knights Templar - Inquisition Trials

An historical example of the (alledged) use of torture to extract confessions.

- Click here for it.

Here's a taste: 

Of the various trials held in France, the first, and one of the larger trials, ran from 19 October to 24 November 1307, and was held in Paris. A total of 138 prisoners gave a full testimony and almost all admitted guilt to one or more charges. Since torture was used to elicit these confessions, the reliability of their testimony before this and other inquisitional tribunals remains an open question. What is known is these earlier confessions contradicted later testimony before the 1310 papal commissions in Paris.[30] Another important trial that was held at Poitiers between 28 June and 2 July 1308 where at least 54 Templars testified before the pope and his commission of cardinals. Here too a considerable number of defendants confessed to one or more of the charges. When asked if their statements were freely given many said that, while they had been tortured or threatened, restricted to bread and water and other forms of harsh treatments had been imposed on them, their confessions were not the results of any torture. But in 1310 at least three said they had lied in front of the Pope and now wished to defend the order.

 

Federalist 78

Hamilton discusses the power of the courts. 

Louisiana v. Callais

QUESTION PRESENTED:

Over the State's strenuous objections, the Middle District of Louisiana held, Robinson v. Ardoin, 605 F. Supp. 3d 759 (M.D. La. 2022)-and the Fifth Circuit affirmed, Robinson v. Ardoin, 86 F.4th 574 (5th Cir. 2023)-that Louisiana likely violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) by failing to create a second majority-Black congressional district. The Fifth Circuit gave the Legislature a small window of time to adopt its own remedial plan, or else the State would have to go to trial, which would almost certainly end in the Middle District imposing its own preferred map. Rather than acquiesce in the Middle District's preferences, the Legislature reclaimed its sovereign redistricting pen and passed S.B. 8, which created a second majority-Black district as the courts demanded, protected the Legislature's sovereign prerogatives, and achieved its political goals.

In this case, a majority of a three-judge court sitting in the Western District of Louisiana enjoined S.B. 8 as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The questions presented are:

1. Did the majority err in finding that race predominated in the Legislature's enactment of S.B. 8?

2. Did the majority err in finding that S.B. 8 fails strict scrutiny?

3. Did the majority err in subjecting S.B. 8 to the Gingles preconditions?

4. Is this action non-justiciable? 

__________

- Oyez.

- ScotusBlog.

- Supreme Court - Oral Argument Transcript.

__________

- Voting Rights Act.

- Voting Rights Act cases. 

From the Texas Tribune: Gov. Greg Abbott names head of new office to investigate higher ed complaints

- Click here for the story.

- Senate Bill 37.

What is an Ombudsman?

From AI Overview: 

An ombudsman is an independent official who investigates complaints against government agencies, businesses, or other organizations. They typically aim to resolve issues through mediation and recommendations, and may work in areas like government services, long-term care facilities, or with specific sectors like financial services or immigration.

What an ombudsman does

Investigates complaints: They look into grievances that individuals or businesses have against an organization or agency.

Acts as a mediator: They help to resolve disputes between parties informally through mediation.

Recommends solutions: They can suggest actions to remedy a complaint or propose changes to administrative practices.

Provides information and advocacy: They can inform people about their rights, help them access services, and advocate for systemic changes.

Examples of specific ombudsman offices

Government: Investigates complaints against government agencies, such as the Office of the Ombudsman for Mental Health and Disability Services.

Long-Term Care: Advocates for residents in nursing homes and assisted living facilities, helps resolve problems, and educates families about their rights, as seen in the Texas Health and Human Services Office of the Ombudsman.

Specific sectors:
Includes offices like the Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) Ombudsman and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Ombudsman.

Small Business: Assists small businesses with complaints about excessive or unfair regulatory enforcement from federal agencies.

On recent days in history

1976 – The first electron micrograph of an Ebola virus is taken at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention by Dr. F. A. Murphy.

1982 – U.S. President Ronald Reagan proclaims a War on Drugs.

1976 – The first electron micrograph of an Ebola virus is taken at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention by Dr. F. A. Murphy.

1949 – The Smith Act trials of Communist Party leaders in the United States convicts eleven defendants of conspiring to advocate the violent overthrow of the federal government.

1884 – George Eastman receives a U.S. Government patent on his new paper-strip photographic film.

1878 – The Edison Electric Light Company begins operation.

1871 – The British in India enact the Criminal Tribes Act, naming many local communities "Criminal Tribes".

1775 – The Continental Congress establishes the Continental Navy (predecessor of the United States Navy).

1773 – America's first insane asylum opens.

1692 – The Salem witch trials are ended by a letter from Province of Massachusetts Bay Governor William Phips.

Links 10.15.2025

- Case v. Montana.

- Federal judge temporarily blocks key parts of state law that limits campus protests.

- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

- Judiciary Act of 1789.

- David Alan Ezra.

- SB 2972.

- 17 statewide propositions will appear on the November ballot. Here’s what Texas voters need to know.

- Oyez: 2025-2026 Term.

- US Code: Title 28.

- Texas SOS: Filing in the 2026 Republican or Democratic Primary Election.

- Foreign Treaties in the Federal Courts.

- Rucho v. Common Cause.

- Article III Judicial Branch.

- Describe the Star Chamber

- List individuals prosecuted by the Star Chamber

The Star Chamber: Precursor to Rebellion

Ask ChatGPT: What federal laws involve appointments to the judicary?

Several federal laws and constitutional provisions govern appointments to the U.S. judiciary. Here’s a clear outline of the main ones:

I. Constitutional Foundation

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 — “Appointments Clause”
- Text: The President “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint … Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States.”
- Effect: Gives the President power to nominate judges.
- Requires Senate confirmation for appointments.
- Establishes the basic legal framework for judicial appointments.

Article III, Section 1
- Creates the Supreme Court and authorizes Congress to establish inferior courts.
- Judges “shall hold their offices during good behaviour,” meaning life tenure unless impeached.
- Guarantees salaries cannot be reduced while in office.

II. Federal Statutes Affecting Judicial Appointments

Judiciary Act of 1789 (1 Stat. 73)
- Created the first system of lower federal courts.
- Gave the President authority to appoint district and circuit judges with Senate approval.
- Established the structure still used as the foundation for today’s judiciary.

Judiciary Act of 1869 (16 Stat. 44)
- Fixed the number of Supreme Court justices at nine.
- Created separate circuit judgeships, ending the old system where Supreme Court justices “rode circuit.”
- Presidents appoint these circuit judges under Article II procedures.

Judicial Improvements Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101–650)
- Authorized new federal judgeships to handle increased caseloads.
- Reaffirmed that all such judges are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.
- 28 U.S.C. §§ 44, 133, 134, and 291–296 (Title 28 of the U.S. Code — Judiciary and Judicial Procedure)
- Define the organization and number of judges on each court.
- Specify the process for temporary and senior judge assignments, but not appointment procedures (those remain under Article II).

Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 (5 U.S.C. §§ 3345–3349d)
- Governs temporary service in positions requiring Senate confirmation (including judicial nominations awaiting confirmation).
- Judicial Nominations and Confirmations Process (Senate Rules & Statutes)
- While much of the confirmation process is governed by Senate rules, some statutes (like the Ethics in Government Act, 5 U.S.C. app.) require background checks and financial disclosures before confirmation.

III. Special Appointment Provisions

Magistrate Judges (28 U.S.C. §§ 631–639)
- Appointed by district judges, not the President.
- Serve renewable eight-year terms.
- Bankruptcy Judges (28 U.S.C. §§ 151–159)
- Appointed by U.S. Courts of Appeals for 14-year terms.
- Not Article III judges; they lack life tenure.

Temporary or Recess Appointments (Article II, Section 2, Clause 3)
- Allows the President to make recess appointments to fill judicial vacancies when the Senate is not in session.
- Such appointments expire at the end of the next Senate session unless confirmed.

- Article 1.

- Article 2.

- Article 3.

- US Code - Title 28.

- Department of Justice.

- Judiciary Acts.

Dear ChatGPT: Provide a short plain-language explainer of the principal legal arguments the challengers will press and the defenses the state is likely to raise regarding the constitutionality of the recent redistricting in Texas.

Who’s involved

- Plaintiffs: Civil-rights organizations (e.g., LULAC, NAACP, MALDEF, Fair Maps Texas), the U.S. Department of Justice, and individual voters.

- Defendant: The State of Texas (Governor Greg Abbott, Secretary of State Jane Nelson, and others in official roles).

What the challengers argue

The challengers make two main kinds of claims:

1. Violation of the Voting Rights Act (VRA), Section 2
- Core argument: The new 2025 map dilutes the voting strength of Black and Latino voters.

How:
- It splits (“cracks”) cohesive minority communities among several districts so they can’t form a majority anywhere.
- It packs some minority voters into a few heavily minority districts, wasting their votes in others.
- Example: In the Austin, Houston, and South Texas areas, plaintiffs say fast-growing Latino populations were divided or attached to heavily white suburban areas, making it harder for Latino voters to elect candidates of their choice.
- Legal standard: Section 2 of the VRA forbids district lines that leave minority voters with less opportunity to participate and elect preferred candidates, even without proof of racist intent.

2. Constitutional violations (14th and 15th Amendments)
- Core argument: The Legislature intentionally discriminated based on race when drawing lines.
- Plaintiffs claim lawmakers had racial data in hand and used it to minimize minority influence while claiming to focus only on partisan advantage.
- They argue this violates equal protection (14th Amendment) and voting rights protections (15th Amendment).

3. Additional claim (in some suits): Partisan gerrymandering
- Plaintiffs say the map goes beyond normal partisanship — that it’s so skewed that it effectively locks in one party’s control and denies fair representation.
- However, federal courts (since Rucho v. Common Cause, 2019) have said partisan gerrymandering is not justiciable under the federal Constitution, so this is more of a supporting argument than a winning claim.

What the state argues in defense

1. Population and partisanship, not race
- Texas says the lines were drawn to account for population growth and protect incumbents, not to discriminate by race.
- The state argues that partisan goals are legal, even if they correlate with racial demographics, and that any impact on minority voters is incidental.

2. Compliance with traditional redistricting principles
- The state claims the map follows legitimate criteria:
- - Equal population,
- - Compactness,
- - Keeping counties and cities whole where possible,
- - Avoiding pairing incumbents against each other.

3. No requirement to create “minority opportunity” districts
- Texas contends Section 2 doesn’t require proportional representation or guarantee a certain number of “minority” districts.
- They argue plaintiffs can’t prove a “geographically compact” minority community that meets the Thornburg v. Gingles test (the key VRA case).

4. Burden of proof
- The state insists that challengers must show both discriminatory effect and intent (for constitutional claims), which it says plaintiffs cannot do.

What happens next

- A three-judge federal court panel in El Paso is handling most of these challenges (LULAC v. Abbott).
- Hearings are underway to decide whether the 2025 map can be used in the 2026 elections or whether an interim map must be drawn.
- The case could eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court, much like earlier Texas redistricting disputes.

- U.S. Election Code

- Texas Election Code

- Texas Secretary of State Elections Division

- Harris County Tax Assessor

- Harris County Clerks Office Elections Division

Dear ChatGPT: What are the controversies associated with mid-decade redistricting?

Mid-decade redistricting — the redrawing of electoral district boundaries between regular census-based redistricting cycles — has generated significant legal, political, and ethical controversies in the U.S. and other democracies. Here’s an outline of the main issues:


1. Violation of Redistricting Norms

- Traditional schedule: Redistricting is normally done once every ten years after the U.S. Census to reflect population changes.

- Controversy: Mid-decade redistricting breaks with that norm, raising accusations that it’s being done for partisan gain rather than population fairness.

- Example: The 2003 Texas mid-decade redistricting, led by Republicans under Tom DeLay, redrew congressional lines to strengthen GOP control — even though the 2001 post-census redistricting had already been completed.


2. Partisan Gerrymandering

- Motivation: Mid-decade redistricting is often used to shift power toward the party currently in control of the state legislature.

- Effect: It can dilute the voting power of the opposition, creating districts that all but guarantee one party’s dominance.

- Legal controversy: Courts have generally allowed partisan redistricting unless it violates racial or constitutional protections, leaving critics frustrated.


3. Undermining Electoral Stability

- Frequent redistricting can:

- Confuse voters about their districts and representatives.

- Disrupt the continuity of representation.

- Reduce accountability by allowing politicians to “choose their voters” mid-cycle.

- Opponents argue this erodes public trust in the fairness of elections.


4. Federalism and Voting Rights Issues

- Mid-decade redistricting can raise Voting Rights Act concerns, particularly if it weakens the voting power of racial or ethnic minorities.

- Example: In League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) v. Perry (2006), the Supreme Court upheld most of the Texas 2003 plan but struck down one district for violating the Voting Rights Act.


5. Potential for Retaliatory Redistricting

- If one party uses mid-decade redistricting to gain advantage, the other may do the same once in power.

- This creates a cycle of political instability and escalation, where districts are constantly redrawn for partisan reasons rather than population changes.


6. Ethical and Democratic Concerns

- Critics argue that mid-decade redistricting prioritizes political manipulation over voter representation.

- It raises questions about:

- - The legitimacy of government power gained through engineered maps.
- - The erosion of competitive elections.
- - The moral fairness of using redistricting as a political weapon.

 

Dear ChatGPT: Provide a timeline of the recent redrawing of Texas United States House districts.

Timeline: Recent Redistricting in Texas (2020s)


April 26, 2021
- U.S. Census Bureau releases apportionment totals: Texas population is ~29,145,505; Texas receives 2 additional congressional seats (for a total of 38). Redistricting Texas

August 12, 2021
- Census Bureau releases the more detailed population data by race/ethnicity needed for redistricting. Redistricting Texas

September 1, 2021
- The RedAppl system is updated for 2021 redistricting. Redistricting Texas

Late 2021 (Nov–Dec)
- Multiple lawsuits consolidated (including Wilson v. Texas, Voto Latino v. Scott, MALC v. Texas, Brooks v. Abbott, Texas State Conference of the NAACP v. Abbott, Fair Maps Texas Action Committee v. Abbott) into LULAC v. Abbott. The U.S. government also files United States v. Texas, alleging H.B. 1 and S.B. 6 (the 2021 congressional and state legislative map bills) violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Redistricting Texas+2Brennan Center for Justice+2

2022
- The legal challenges continue. Some cases are dismissed, others proceed. Meanwhile the 2021 map (used for the 2022 elections) remains in effect. All About Redistricting+1

2023
- Texas Legislature re-passes (ratifies) its state legislative maps: the House map (HB 1000) and Senate map (SB 375), which had been established earlier (in 2021) and reaffirmed in 2023 with little substantive change. All About Redistricting+1

May 21 – June 12, 2025
- Oral arguments (trial) are heard in LULAC v. Abbott in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, El Paso Division. Redistricting Texas+2Brennan Center for Justice+2

July 9, 2025
- Governor Greg Abbott issues a proclamation calling a special session of the 89th Legislature to begin July 21, 2025. Among the items on the agenda is consideration of a revised congressional redistricting plan. Redistricting Texas+2The Texas Tribune+2

July 21, 2025
- First called special legislative session begins. The special session is tasked in part with drafting new congressional maps. Redistricting Texas+1

August 15, 2025
- The Legislature adjourns sine die (without having passed a new congressional redistricting plan in the first special session). Governor Abbott then issues a new proclamation calling a second special session to address the redistricting issue. Redistricting Texas+1

August 20, 2025
- Texas House passes H.B. 4, a congressional map (also called PlanC2333) in the second special session. The map is designed for elections beginning in 2026; it is very favorable to Republicans, aiming to shift several current Democratic-held U.S. House seats. Redistricting Texas+3Wikipedia+3AP News+3

August 23, 2025
- Texas Senate passes the new map. Wikipedia+1

August 25, 2025
- Plaintiffs in LULAC v. Abbott file motions to supplement earlier complaints to challenge the new map (H.B. 4, PlanC2333), including requests for preliminary and permanent injunctive relief. Redistricting Texas+2Brennan Center for Justice+2

August 29, 2025
- Governor Greg Abbott signs H.B. 4 (PlanC2333) into law. This becomes the active Texas congressional district map for the 2026 elections. Redistricting Texas+1

October 1, 2025
- A U.S. District Court hearing scheduled for October 1–10 in El Paso to consider whether the new map can be preliminarily blocked for use in the 2026 elections. Plaintiffs argue it violates the Voting Rights Act and/or the U.S. Constitution (racial gerrymandering / dilution of minority voting power). Redistricting Texas+2The Texas Tribune+2

 https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1305047944983451&set=a.302696038551985&type=3

The Texas Open Meetings Act

From Open AI

The Open Meetings Act (like the Texas Open Meetings Act) is a law requiring governmental bodies to conduct public business openly, ensuring transparency by allowing public observation of decision-making processes. These laws mandate public notice, open meetings (with specific exceptions for sensitive topics like personnel or ongoing negotiations), and minutes or recordings of meetings.

Purpose of the Open Meetings Act

Transparency: To make sure that government business is conducted openly, so citizens can understand how decisions are made.

Public Participation: To allow the public to observe and, in some cases, participate in the decision-making process.

Accountability: To hold governmental bodies accountable for their actions and to foster trust in government.

Key Requirements

Public Notice: Governmental bodies must provide public notice of the time, place, and subject matter of upcoming meetings.

Open to the Public: Meetings are generally open to the public, with some exceptions for sensitive matters.

Minutes/Recordings: Minutes of meetings or recordings must be kept to document what happened during the meeting.

Who is Covered?

State and Local Governments: City councils, county boards, school boards, and state commissions are typically covered.

Special Districts: Water, sewer, or other special districts are often included.

Certain Nonprofits: Some nonprofit organizations that receive public funds or are created by law may also be subject to the Act.

Exceptions

Personnel Matters: Discussions about employees or public officials are often allowed in closed sessions.

Ongoing Negotiations: Sensitive topics like land acquisition or pending litigation may be discussed in closed meetings.

Deliberation on Sensitive Matters: Specific exceptions allow for closed sessions to discuss topics that, if made public, could harm the government entity's interests.

From Oyez: Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment

A case on the docket of the current meetign of the Supreme Court. 

It involves the copyright - an enumerated power.

- Click here for info. 

Question: Can an internet service provider be held liable, and found to have acted willfully, for copyright infringement just because it knew users were infringing and did not terminate their access?

Dear ChatGPT: Outline the contrasting views of Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft regarding the powers of the president

Here’s a clear outline of the contrasting views of Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft on presidential power:


1. Theodore Roosevelt – The "Stewardship Theory"

Philosophy: Roosevelt believed the president should act as a "steward of the people" — using all powers not explicitly forbidden by the Constitution to serve the public good.

Key Principle: If the Constitution doesn’t prohibit it, the president can do it.

View of Executive Power:
- Broad, energetic, and proactive.
- The president is the moral and political leader of the nation.
- Executive power should expand to meet the needs of a changing society.

Examples:
- Used executive orders and actions aggressively to regulate business, conserve natural resources, and mediate labor disputes.
- Justified his actions as serving the “public welfare.”


2. William Howard Taft – The "Legalistic" or "Constitutional" View

Philosophy: Taft held a strict constructionist or limited view of presidential power.

Key Principle: The president can only do what the Constitution or Congress explicitly authorizes.

View of Executive Power:
- Restricted to powers granted by law.
- The president is an administrator, not a reformer or crusader.
-Feared that broad interpretations of power could lead to executive overreach.

Examples:
- Avoided unilateral action, preferring to work through Congress and the courts.
- Criticized Roosevelt’s activist presidency as unconstitutional.

Links - 10.8.25

- Former Berkeley Lab Scientist John Clarke Wins 2025 Nobel Prize in Physics.

- Current Federal Civilian Employment by State and Congressional District.

- Federal Workforce Statistics Sources: OPM and OMB.

- These Early US Fire Departments Were Violent, Coercive Political Gangs.

- Could Trump run as vice president in 2028, bypass the U.S. Constitution and become president a third time?

- Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

- Basic Energy Sciences.

- Materials science.

- Wright Flyer III.

- United States Army Signal Corps.

- Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections.

From Brilliant Maps: 200 Years Of Us Population Growth In 2 Minutes

We've seen the development of counites in the US, but not cities. 

This is a good proxy for that. We can assume that organized forces helped lure people westward after independence. This shows where and when.

- Click here for it.

- Click here for List of most populous cities in the United States by decade.

Dear ChatGPT: What is a Critical Election?

The theory of critical elections identifies elections that lead to a major and lasting shift in political power and party coalitions. There is scholarly debate on exactly which elections qualify as "critical," but several are widely cited as having produced long-term electoral realignments in the United States.


American critical elections

- 1800: Thomas Jefferson's victory over incumbent John Adams marked the first peaceful transfer of power between opposing parties and the decline of the Federalist Party.
- - Election of 1800.
- - Presidency of Thomas Jefferson.

- 1828: Andrew Jackson's election is associated with the rise of mass democracy and the development of the modern Democratic Party.
- - Election of 1828.
- - Presidency of Andrew Jackson.

- 1860: Abraham Lincoln's victory triggered the secession of Southern states, leading to the Civil War and establishing the Republican Party as a major national force.
- - Election of 1860.
- - Presidency of Abraham Lincoln.

- 1896: William McKinley's win over William Jennings Bryan cemented a period of Republican dominance that lasted for three decades. The election was marked by shifting voter coalitions, particularly involving urban workers and populist movements.
- - Election of 1896.
- - Presidency of William McKinley.

- 1932: Franklin D. Roosevelt's election and the Great Depression solidified the New Deal Democratic coalition, which included urban ethnic groups, industrial workers, and African Americans.
- - Election of 1932.
- - Presidency of Franklin Roosevelt.

- 1968–1972: Political scientists often point to this period as a realignment that saw the erosion of the New Deal coalition. Richard Nixon's 1968 election and his subsequent "Southern Strategy," along with the election of 1972, marked a significant shift in Southern voting behavior from the Democratic to the Republican Party.
- - Election of 1968.
- - Richard Nixon 1968 presidential campaign.
- - Presidency of Richard Nixon.


What defines a critical election?

- The concept of a "critical election" was first advanced by political scientist V. O. Key, Jr.. Key noted that in these elections: Voters are unusually concerned about the outcome.

- Voter turnout is higher than normal.

- New, durable party coalitions are formed, and the existing political parties reconfigure.

- A new majority party typically emerges.

- Later scholarship challenged the idea that electoral realignments only happen in a single, sudden election.

- The concept of "secular realignment" suggests that some changes happen more gradually over time. The elections of 1968 and 1972, for example, are considered part of a broader realignment period that reshaped the party system.