The coming liberal Supreme Court

There really are no good reasons for why Donald Trump would be a better president than Hillary Clinton. I say this, of course, with the caveat that I despise her and believe she’ll be a secretive, terrible president (so it’s a testament to how awful Trump is that I would consider her the lesser of two evils). Somehow, Dylan Matthews managed to lay out the only element in this that gives me pause:

How the first liberal Supreme Court in a generation could reshape America
Not voting on Merrick Garland continues to be a major mistake for the GOP. I don’t believe they should approve him, but hearings and a rejected confirmation vote are exactly what he deserves. It will also send a message that as long as the GOP maintains a congressional majority, it will not confirm liberal justices to the Supreme Court, period. The reality is that a judge who resembles Antonin Scalia won’t be nominated any time soon. But we also do not need to tolerate the appointment of an additional Sotomayor or Ginsberg. We should be fighting for someone like an Anthony Kennedy to keep the court positioned as close to center until the White House is back in Republican hands.

A tale of two party insurgencies
I’ve said many times that the Trump and Sanders candidacies are campaigns trying to solve the same problem, but just taking wildly different paths to get there. It’s disingenuous for either party to point toward their passionate bases as proof of the party’s engagement, since they exist specifically to tear down the existing structure. The American Interest compares the two insurgent campaigns and argues that Sanders is the one more likely to have a long-term impact on his party.

How things work
Gawker shut down this week. This final piece, published by founder Nick Denton, is a reflection on what they tried to build, and how it all went wrong. I agree with the viewpoint that shutting down Gawker is a bad thing — not because I personally loved the site, but because I find the strategy that brought on this result to be a major affront to the freedom of our independent press. The bar for suing the press is and ought to be exceptionally high, and not motivated by “taste.” Likewise, placing significant financial liability on a reporter only incentivizes sanitized reporting: a dangerous sentiment in a world where reputable investigation is needed more than ever.

Baltimore’s secret surveillance program
How could anyone possibly think that mass surveillance of an entire city without even telling the public it’s happening is a good idea? Blue states and governments have become even more dangerous than the right-wing ones they once demonized. Our basic constitutional rights are being constantly eroded by programs like this, and both sides of the aisle are equally guilty. At what point are we going to stop seeing technology as a short-circuit to basic rights of privacy?

How do we battle the next downturn?
During the central bank meetings in Jackson Hole this week, one item dominated the agenda: in a world with low interest rates, low inflation, and an unstable recovery, how do we fight the next recession?