New Yorker detected political influence on SCOTUS a year ago

[True Dough]

[Silent Type]

1. Excellent. Some of the media gets it, at times.

[highplainsdem]

10. That time, for that cover, was last July after the immunity ruling.

[JoetheShow]

2. Love the image of the court, and we have a new bumper sticker as well - SAFT

Save America From Trump. It doesn't quite have that fire-breathing quality, but I'll take it.

[UTUSN]

3. K&R for, *excellent*! - they should have done the hands swollen & bruised.

[highplainsdem]

4. That cover is from last July, responding to the immunity ruling. Not sure there were any photos of

Trump's swollen hands by then.

[UTUSN]

6. I'm always so out of touch and needing correction!1 - I assume posts are current

[highplainsdem]

8. It's perfectly understandable to assume it's current. The date is on the magazine cover, but the OP

should also have pointed out that the cover is nearly a year old.

And the thread title should have read "took on" instead of "takes on" because "takes on" suggests it's the current cover.

[UTUSN]

11. "date/cover" - another of my flaws, I don't go that deep on posts, wouldn't notice such details.

And I don't blame the OPs. I'm a Generalist, superficial - worse, frequently Rec or accept posts by the thread title and by the name of the poster without fully reading the content! - *shocking*! - And even more frequently, skip threads based on such superficial grounds!

There, I've said it!

[Grim Chieftain]

5. Damn! That's powerful.

and spot on. Fortunately, some of the media is stepping up and speaking out.

[PatSeg]

7. Whoa, damn!

Not subtle at all!

[highplainsdem]

9. True Dough, the "takes on" wording in your thread title makes it sound like this is a new cover when it's a year old.

People are assuming it's new. Would you please make it clearer that it's from last July? Thanks!

[True Dough]

13. highplainsdem,

The cover has gone "viral" again in light of the decision in the birthright citizen case. The image in my OP shows the date that the cover was issued, July 2024. I trust DUers will be able to read that. "Takes on" in no way misleads anyone.

[highplainsdem]

16. It's obvious from the replies in both threads about that cover that not everyone noticed the cover date. Your

present-tense wording does suggest it's a new cover - and that is misleading and in fact makes it much less likely anyone would even look for that cover date. Present tense also, of course, makes it more likely people will look at an old cover. Just as it's more likely people will look at an old anti-Trump quote if they think it's new rather than from years ago.

It's simply fairer to DUers to make it clear this was an old cover responding to a Supreme Court decision last year. Otherwise you might have people here sharing that cover as a new one.

[True Dough]

19. I see no other complaint like yours

Doesn't seem to be a groundswell of concern and everyone can see your misgivings with their own eyes.

[highplainsdem]

20. Most people responding quickly to OPs never look at the replies, which is why we so often see hoaxes

trending even when there are a number of replies debunking them. People who simply rec an OP are especially likely to skip the replies.

It's interesting that you'd need "a groundswell of concern" before you'd change a misleading thread title. You seem resistant to making sure people know it's an old cover about an old ruling.

[Gimpyknee]

21. I'm in complete agreement with highplainsdem.

[MadameButterfly]

25. I thought it was new until Higplainsdem pointed it out

People were responding as if this was the medial finally taking on Trump now.
Definitely misleading.

[True Dough]

26. The thread title

has been revised.

[State the Obvious]

12. So what? It is perfect.....

There is no expiration date on TRUTH (and in this case via graphics!)

[mountain grammy]

14. The New Yorker never gives an inch

To fascists. Courage is in their blood!

[Emile]

15. Spot on!

Sharing this with all my friends.

[dalton99a]

17. Kick

[spanone]

18. K&R

[WOLFMAN87]

22. It is pellucidly clear that

This this is how the court looks
Anything Trump does is just fine with 6 Republicans in robes but if a Democrat tries to forgive student loans, well that's got to be stopped.

[Martin68]

23. Well done NYT!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

24. The most corrupt SCOTUS in history

[Heftylefty]

27. Political influence on SCOTUS

Then Senator Hillary Clinton nailed it with her explanation of voting 'no' on Alito's nomination in 2006. Every GOP nominee to the court since has been cut from the same cloth. "I fear that Judge Alito will roll back decades of progress and roll over when confronted with an administration too willing to flaunt the rules and looking for a rubber stamp,"