Two major New York unions, both of which had put pressure on Andrew Cuomo to step down, have endorsed him in the mayor race.

Two influential New York City labor unions that backed Mayor Eric Adams in 2021 switched their support on Monday to former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, reflecting his growing dominance as the race for mayor accelerates.

The coveted endorsements came from the Hotel and Gaming Trades Council and Local 32BJ of the Service Employees International Union, which represents building workers. Together, the unions have more than 125,000 members and typically spend millions of dollars supporting their chosen candidates.

Both unions have a contentious history with Mr. Cuomo. They worked with him to pass a statewide increase to the minimum wage and other policies as governor, but later called for his resignation in 2021 amid mounting sexual harassment accusations. (Mr. Cuomo, who resigned, denies any wrongdoing.)

Now, they have concluded that Mr. Adams is fading politically and Mr. Cuomo has an increasingly direct path to City Hall. And like much of the city’s Democratic establishment, the unions appear more interested in making amends than antagonizing a famously sharp-elbowed leader who could have influence over city contracts and other priorities.

This is almost certainly it. The NYC mayoral race is a mess. When you have like 15 candidates all vying for the anti-Cuomo vote, it means none of them are going to win. Andrew Cuomo is both powerful, competent, and a dick. Moreover, it’s quite likely that if one of the other candidates somehow actually does win, they aren’t really going to hold it over the unions because those unions can then offer them a lot of support going forward. Meanwhile, if they don’t endorse Cuomo and Cuomo wins, he will have revenge on their members. The fact of the matter is that Andrew Cuomo is going to be the next mayor of New York City and this move is very strong evidence in favor of that, as depressing as it might be. Labor is looking out for its members here, reading the landscape and realizing that none of these other people are going to separate from the pack.

The post Power Plays in New York appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

Today’s 5-4 order vacating a temporary restraining order preventing further deportations of accused members of Tren de Aragua under the Alien Enemies Act (ACB dissenting with the three liberals) follows a familiar pattern:

• An ipse dixit in a brief, unsigned opinion that sounds facially reasonable because all of the relevant context has been stripped out.
• An “are we the baddies?” concurrence from Kavanaugh making further unpersuasive attempts to minimize the Court’s pernicious action.
• Unanswerable dissents that the Court mostly just ignores on the merits, while huffing about the “rhetoric” of the dissenting opinions.

While acknowledging that notice and due process are required before deportation, he Court vacates the order under the theory that the detainees can only seek relief under habeas corpus and not the APA, which means that cases have to be brought in the jurisdiction where the detainees were being held (in this case Texas.) As Sotomayor observes, this requirement allows the administration to venue shop for the jurisdictions most hostile to the rights of the detainees, and as Sotomayor says the desire for venue shopping is certainly not adequate justification for an emergency intervention.

I recommend reading Sotomayor’s dissent in full, but I think this is the heart of it:

What if the Government later determines that it sent one of these detainees to CECOT in error? Or a court eventually decides that the President lacked authority under the Alien Enemies Act to declare that Tren de Aragua is perpetrating or attempting an “invasion” against the territory of the United States? The Government takes the position that, even when it makes a mistake, it cannot retrieve individuals from the Salvadoran prisons to which it has sent them. The implication of the Government’s position is that not only noncitizens but also United States citizens could be taken off the streets, forced onto planes, and confined to foreign prisons with no opportunity for redress if judicial review is denied unlawfully before removal. History is no stranger to such lawless regimes, but this Nation’s system of laws is designed to prevent, not enable, their rise.

[…]

That requirement may have life or death consequences. Individuals who are unable to secure counsel, or who cannot timely appeal an adverse judgment rendered by a habeas court, face the prospect of removal directly into the perilous conditions of El Salvador’s CECOT, where detainees suffer egregious human rights abuses. Anyone the Government mistakenly deports in its piecemeal and rushed implementation of the challenged Proclamation will face the same grave risks.

The stakes are all the more obvious in light of the Government’s insistence that, once it sends someone to CECOT, it cannot be made to retrieve them. The Government is at this very moment seeking emergency relief from an order requiring it to facilitate the return of an individual the Government concededly removed to CECOT “because of an administrative error.”

The Government’s resistance to facilitating the return of individuals erroneously removed to CECOT only amplifies the specter that, even if this Court someday declares the President’s Proclamation unlawful, scores of individual lives may be irretrievably lost. More fundamentally, this Court exercises its equitable discretion to intervene without accounting for the Government noncompliance that has permeated this litigation to date.

[….]

The Government’s conduct in this litigation poses an extraordinary threat to the rule of law. That a majority of this Court now rewards the Government for its behavior with discretionary equitable relief is indefensible. We, as a Nation and a court of law, should be better than this. I respectfully dissent.

It’s also critical to note that the AEA requires that we be at war with the relevant country, which we are not. It has only been in invoked during the War of 1812 and World Wars I and II.

Jackson has a shorter dissent noting that this is yet another abuse of the emergency docket:

The President of the United States has invoked a centuries-old wartime statute to whisk people away to a notoriously brutal, foreign-run prison. For lovers of liberty, this should be quite concerning. Surely, the question whether such Government action is consistent with our Constitution and laws warrants considerable thought and attention from the Judiciary. That was why the District Court issued a temporary restraining order to prevent immediate harm to the targeted individuals while the court considered the lawfulness of the Government’s conduct. But this Court now sees fit to intervene, hastily dashing off a four-paragraph per curiam opinion discarding the District Court’s order based solely on a new legal pronouncement that, one might have thought, would require significant deliberation.

[…]

I lament that the Court appears to have embarked on a new era of procedural variability, and that it has done so in such a casual, inequitable, and, in my view, inappropriate manner. At least when the Court went off base in the past, it left a record so posterity could see how it went wrong. See, e.g., Korematsu v. United States, 323 U. S. 214 (1944). With more and more of our most significant rulings taking place in the shadows of our emergency docket, today’s Court leaves less and less of a trace. But make no mistake: We are just as wrong now as we have been in the past, with similarly devastating consequences. It just seems we are now less willing to face it.

It’s a very bad opinion, and what it portends is even worse.

The post Today on the shadow docket: assisting Trump’s arbitrary deportations to slave prisons appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

This amusingly overbuilt Long Point Pencil Sharpener is by California-based stationery company Blackwing.

Rather than sharpening your pencil point into a mere cone, it cuts a curved taper into it; this shape, the company claims, "resists breakage."

The sharpener is made of machined aluminum, and the blade is German steel.

Comes in three colors, and runs $22.

Back in 1992, Chris Columbus was either the guy who directed "Home Alone" or the guy who "discovered" America. And that year, Giorgetto Giugiaro's Italdesign released a wild concept vehicle called The Columbus (in memory of the latter CC).

The "ultra-high level status vehicle" was meant to celebrate the 500th anniversary of Christopher Columbus' voyage to America (before that came to be seen as problematic). The minivan's swoopy, nautical style lines say Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria more than they do Dodge Caravan.

"Mini" van might be the wrong term, though that's what Italdesign called it. The vehicle was actually 6 meters (19.7') long and seated up to nine people.

The driving position is elevated for better visibility, and the engine—a 5-liter BMW V-12—was beneath the driver's position. Startlingly for the time, the driver's seat was in the center of the vehicle. (The McLaren F1, which also adopted this arrangement, wasn't released until the following year.)

Unsurprisingly, the vehicle never saw production.

I rewatched Wes Anderson’s 2009 film Fantastic Mr. Fox again and I have to say that it might be my very favorite of his films. Now, I get it if you don’t like Anderson. It’s an aesthetic alright and if it isn’t yours, you probably find him unbearable. As for the films being all the same, well, that’s not uncommon of many directors, so I don’t have a lot of patience for that argument. It’s just that you don’t like the films being all the same in this kind of way. Again, that’s OK. I admit that his whimsy and put-ons have varying degrees of effectiveness over a now pretty long career. But I do like it when Anderson turns to animation and his adaptation of Roald Dahl’s story is pretty great. For one, George Clooney is absolutely perfect as the fox. The combination of ridiculousness, arrogance, and male ego works very well and Clooney can really deliver that. Meryl Streep as Mrs. Fox is almost as good, though she’s asked to do less. Of course Jason Schwartzmann, Bill Murray, and Owen Wilson show up doing basically their normal thing in a different role. I am amused at Brian Cox as the reporter. Willem Dafoe as the rat is great too. And I happen to love the animation, though I confess to being no expert on the subject and having not nearly as much knowledge as anyone who cares about the topic in any more than a passing way. I’m surprised this didn’t make a ton of money, though it did generate a small profit at the time that has grown over the years. Anyway, it’s highly enjoyable. After all, we are all just wild animals.

The post LGM Film Club, Part 497: Fantastic Mr. Fox appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

From the Beetle to the Rabbit to the Golf, Volkswagen has long made affordable, practical cars that those with smaller budgets can afford. Now they're aiming that prowess at the EV market with the unveiling of their ID EVERY1.

The concept car is intended to make the transition into production for €20,000 (USD $21,667) in 2027. Hailed as "affordable entry-level all-electric mobility" by Thomas Schäfer, CEO of Volkswagen Passenger Cars, the 94hp vehicle will reportedly have a range of 155 miles.

Aesthetically, the vehicle was designed to have a friendly, approachable look. "Our ambition was to create something bold yet accessible," says Andreas Mindt, Volkswagen's Head of Design. "The ID EVERY1 has a self-assured appearance but remains likeable – thanks to details such as the dynamic front lights and the 'smiling' rear. These design elements make it more than just a car: they give it character and an identity that people can relate to."

The big question for Americans is whether that €20,000 sticker will apply in 2027, given the way our current administration's tariff war is going. The point may be moot; sadly, VW has announced no plans to bring this affordable EV to the U.S. market. With any luck things will change in two years' time.