The last few seconds of this statement by President Trump on the sad story of Otto Warmbier, who died on Monday, have me (and I assume Kim Jong-un) wondering what he's thinking now:
The Supreme Court issued two important rulings on Monday. I found the right answers obvious, and the Court's opinions were unanimous as to the key aspects of both cases. Perhaps most remarkable is that any court ever ruled the other way.
In Matal v Tam (formerly Lee v Tam), the Court ruled that the US Patent and Trademark Office could not refuse to issue a trademark on the basis that it was deemed offensive. In this case, an Asian-American band tried to trademark their band's name, The Slants. It was denied by the PTO which was upheld in a lower court but then overturned by a federal court, eventually reaching SCOTUS. The big winner, in addition to The Slants, is the Washington Redskins organization which also had its trademark renewal declined in a decision that will have to be overturned by the PTO now.
In Packingham v North Carolina, the Court ruled unconstitutional a law barring sex offenders from any involvement in social media web sites or any other web sites that allow comments or other sorts of communication with users. Mr. Packingham, a convicted sex offender, was charged with a crime after posting on Facebook how happy he was that a court let him out of a traffic fine. The law is obviously overly broad and unconstitutional. Again, it's incredible that Packingham ever lost a case on the merits despite his not being the most sympathetic victim of bad legislation.
“Woke Daddy” makes me want to gag a bit.
On the other hand, I really kinda like this story, especially that President Trump seemed to go along quite willingly. I wish all of this sort of stuff was less political, and Trump's nonchalance about gender-related issues is one of the few bright spots in his personality. That said, I'm not sure it's really appropriate to use a "fierce pose" in the Oval Office...
The teacher was interviewed on CNN