Latest news with #StanfordLawSchool
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Former Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter dies at 85
Retired Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter, the shy and frugal small-town New Englander who was touted as a conservative but surprised his Republican backers and nearly everyone else by becoming a staunch liberal on the high court, has died, the court said in a statement Friday. He was 85. Souter stepped down in 2009 after nearly two decades on the court where he cast key votes to uphold laws on campaign finance, environmental protection, civil rights and church-state separation. He also played a crucial role in upholding a woman's right to choose abortion. As an appointee of President George H.W. Bush, Souter was expected to join with then-Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and other conservatives who were determined to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that expanded abortion rights. But when a Pennsylvania test case came before the court in 1992, Souter instead joined moderate Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony M. Kennedy to affirm the right to abortion. Souter saw the issue as a matter of precedent. Repealing the constitutional right to abortion would be 'a surrender to political pressure,' he wrote. 'To overrule under fire in the absence of the most compelling reason to re-examine a watershed decision would subvert the Court's legitimacy beyond any serious question.' A second 5-4 decision that spring, with Souter in the majority, upheld the strict ban on school-sponsored prayers at graduations. The five justices who voted to uphold the abortion right and the ban on school prayers were all Republican appointees. But they no longer reflected the views of a more socially conservative GOP, and Souter was denounced by some in the party as a turn-coat. By the late 1990s, 'No more Souters' had become a rallying cry for conservative legal activists. 'Justice Souter was a judicial version of a disappearing phenomenon: the moderate New England Republican,' said Pamela Karlan, a professor at Stanford Law School. 'He was not a true liberal and would not have been a liberal on the court of the 1960s and '70s. But he believed in privacy and civil rights and precedents, and that made him a liberal on the court of his day.' He was unusual in other ways. Shortly after he arrived as a new justice in 1990, he was dubbed one of the city's 'most eligible bachelors' in the Washington Post, leading to a series of dinner invitations. He usually found himself seated between a single woman and a guest who spoke only Japanese, he later joked. Souter became adept at turning down invitations. He would dine with Justice John Paul Stevens and his wife, or with O'Connor, but mostly he worked and ate alone. He spent evenings jogging along the waterfront near his small apartment. Whenever the court took an extended break, Souter drove to the farmhouse where he grew up in tiny Weare, N.H., so he could hike. He was in good health and not yet 70 when President Obama moved into the White House in early 2009. Soon after, Souter passed word that he intended to retire. Obama chose Judge Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina on the high court, to replace him. Souter was dubbed a 'stealth nominee' when he arrived in Washington in 1990, and he remained a mystery when he left. He did no interviews and made no public statements. Back in New Hampshire, he continued to serve part time as a retired judge on the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston, deciding low-profile cases out of the public spotlight. Souter was not the first justice to surprise the president who appointed him, but he may be among the last. Since Souter's time — and indeed, partly in reaction to him — presidents have carefully selected court nominees with public records showing they shared similar views on legal issues. Souter had deep ties to the Republican Party. He carried a gold watch that was a prized possession of a great-great-grandfather who attended the Republican party convention of 1860 that nominated Abraham Lincoln as president. The GOP supported environmental conservation and the separation of church and state when Souter was growing up. But it grew increasingly more conservative over the decades, and Souter didn't always agree. In July 1990, he was a 50-year-old bachelor who lived alone in a farm house with peeling paint and books on the floor. He had just been named to the U.S. court of appeals in Boston. Until then, he had spent his entire career as a prosecutor, state attorney and judge in New Hampshire. His scholarly manner and devotion to the law had won him influential admirers, including then-Sen. Warren Rudman and former New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu, who was then-White House chief of staff to the first President Bush. When the Supreme Court's liberal leader, William J. Brennan, suffered a stroke and announced his retirement, Souter's name made the president's short list of possible nominees. Bush was anxious to avoid a fight with Senate Democrats over abortion and civil rights. Republicans still smarted from the Senate's defeat in 1987 of Judge Robert Bork, whose strongly conservative writings convinced critics he was too extreme to be confirmed. Souter seemed an ideal nominee. He was conservative, or at least old-fashioned. He wrote with a fountain pen, not a computer. And he ignored television. He only learned Brennan was stepping down when a postal clerk in his town shared the news. Two days later, Souter stood in the White House press room as Bush announced his nomination. Souter was said to have no 'paper trail,' but Sununu privately assured activists that he would be a 'home run for conservatives.' Liberal Democrats, led by Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, were Souter's sharpest critics that summer, while the arch-conservative Sen. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina led the fight to confirm him. In less than two years, it became clear that both sides had miscalculated. By the mid-1990s, Souter had allied himself with Stevens, another moderate Republican who also seemed to move left, and with Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer, the two appointees of President Clinton. They formed a liberal bloc in cases where the court split along ideological lines. David Hackett Souter was born in Melrose, Mass., on Sept. 17, 1939, the only child of Joseph and Helen Souter. His father was a banker and his mother a gift shop clerk. When he was 11, the family moved to the New Hampshire farm house in Weare that remained Souter's primary home until after his retirement. As a Harvard undergraduate, Souter dated a young woman and spoke of marrying her. But when he won a prestigious Rhodes Scholarship and went to England to study at Oxford University, she found someone else. Souter told friends he was disappointed he never married. After graduating from Harvard Law School in 1966, he eschewed the big-city law firms and returned to the small-town life and rugged mountains of the New Hampshire he loved. Friends and former clerks say Souter was never a true conservative as his early backers said, nor was he a solid liberal as he was portrayed years later. Souter was 'a judge's judge,' said Penn Law Professor Kermit Roosevelt, who clerked for him in 1999. 'He didn't have a political agenda. People had a mistaken idea of what they were getting when he was appointed.' Sign up for Essential California for the L.A. Times biggest news, features and recommendations in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Shannon Sharpe Refuses to View Alleged Sex Tape in $50 Million Civil Rape Lawsuit
NFL Hall of Famer and prominent media figure Shannon Sharpe is facing a $50 million civil lawsuit filed by a woman using the pseudonym 'Jane Doe,' who accuses him of rape and coercion during a relationship she claims was non-consensual. Central to the case is a controversial video recording allegedly showing one of the encounters in question. The footage has reportedly been offered for viewing to Sharpe, who has refused to watch it despite multiple opportunities. Below is a detailed breakdown of the case, key evidence, legal arguments, and the public discourse surrounding this high-profile litigation. Jane Doe filed the civil suit earlier this year, asserting that she was subjected to repeated sexual assault and manipulation by Shannon Sharpe beginning in 2023 when she was 19 years old. Her legal team contends that Sharpe exploited a significant power imbalance, using his celebrity and financial influence to dominate and degrade her in a series of non-consensual encounters. According to the complaint, the conduct occurred over several months and caused lasting psychological harm. The suit includes claims for sexual battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and unlawful restraint, among others. Sharpe has denied all allegations and characterized the relationship as consensual. He argues that the interactions described in the lawsuit were part of a mutual BDSM dynamic involving role-play and fantasy scenarios. A pivotal element of the plaintiff's case is a video allegedly depicting one of the encounters described in the lawsuit. According to Attorney Tony Buzbee, who is representing Jane Doe, the video demonstrates a lack of consent and is 'central' to the civil claims being pursued. Buzbee confirmed that the video was reviewed in a confidential mediation setting by Sharpe's legal team, but Sharpe himself declined repeated invitations to view it. He emphasized that the footage will not be released publicly, citing both legal and ethical considerations. 'The only reason the public knows this video exists is because Mr. Sharpe brought it up on Instagram,' Buzbee said in a statement. 'At no point have we ever threatened to release it, and we will not. It is evidence, nothing more, nothing less.' Sharpe has publicly described the video as a '30-second clip designed to make me look guilty,' asserting that it was taken out of context and crafted to play into damaging racial and sexual stereotypes. Legal analysts have taken note of Sharpe's refusal to personally review the video, describing it as a potentially risky decision in a civil case where perception and credibility can significantly impact the outcome. 'Although he has no legal obligation to view the footage, his refusal may be viewed unfavorably by a jury,' explained Professor Lena Hartwell of Stanford Law School. 'It may suggest avoidance or unwillingness to confront evidence that could challenge his narrative.' Sharpe's legal team has not publicly elaborated on his refusal. However, individuals familiar with the defense suggest that Sharpe believes the clip is misleading and was deliberately recorded to distort the nature of the relationship. Public reaction to the lawsuit has been shaped not only by the legal filings but also by Sharpe's high-profile status and previous controversies. In September 2024, Sharpe mistakenly broadcasted explicit audio of a sexual encounter during an Instagram Live session. Initially claiming he was hacked, Sharpe later admitted the incident was accidental, citing confusion over the platform's features. Critics have pointed to that episode and his subsequent remarks as evidence of reckless behavior. Supporters argue it has no bearing on the current case and represents an unrelated personal mistake. Sharpe has used his social media platforms and appearances on First Take to publicly denounce the lawsuit as a baseless attempt to extort him. He has also accused Attorney Buzbee of targeting Black public figures, referencing Buzbee's past cases against athletes, including former NFL quarterback Deshaun Watson. The woman identified as Jane Doe has kept her identity confidential, citing concerns for her safety and mental well-being. Buzbee maintains that his client came forward not for publicity but because she believes a grave injustice occurred, and she has a right to seek redress through the legal system. 'She is not hiding. She is protecting herself,' Buzbee said. 'This case is about her right to be heard, her right to be believed, and her right to justice.' The plaintiff is reportedly cooperating fully with legal proceedings, has submitted medical documentation supporting claims of psychological trauma, and has expressed her willingness to testify under appropriate conditions. The case is currently in the discovery phase, during which both sides exchange evidence, conduct depositions, and prepare expert testimony. No criminal charges have been filed at this time, and the matter remains strictly within the civil legal arena. Sharpe's attorneys are expected to file additional motions in the coming weeks, potentially including a countersuit for defamation and an effort to seal sensitive materials. A trial date has not been scheduled yet, but pre-trial hearings are expected to begin in late summer. Observers anticipate that the outcome of the case will rest heavily on how the video is interpreted in court, the credibility of both parties under oath, and how jurors assess the power dynamics described in the complaint. As the lawsuit against Shannon Sharpe continues to unfold, the stakes remain extraordinarily high for both parties. For the plaintiff, the case represents a pursuit of justice for alleged abuse at the hands of an influential figure. For Sharpe, it is a battle to protect his name, career, and future in both sports media and public life. The decision not to view a key piece of evidence has raised legal and public scrutiny, potentially influencing how Sharpe's defense is received if the matter proceeds to trial. In a case defined by opposing interpretations of consent and power, the months ahead will likely determine not only the legal outcome but the broader narrative surrounding one of sports media's most prominent voices. The post Shannon Sharpe Refuses to View Alleged Sex Tape in $50 Million Civil Rape Lawsuit appeared first on Where Is The Buzz | Breaking News, Entertainment, Exclusive Interviews & More.
News18
27-04-2025
- Politics
- News18
Indian-origin Politician Jenifer Rajkumar Faces Criticism Over ‘Racist' Meme
Last Updated: Jenifer Rajkumar has gained significant attention in the Public Advocate race for New York City as she takes on Jumaane Williams. News18 Indian-American politician and lawyer Jenifer Rajkumar, running for the Public Advocate for New York City, recently landed herself in hot water, sharing a controversial meme about her meme on social media. Jenifer, a graduate from the Stanford Law School and the University of Pennsylvania, earlier made history by becoming the first South Asian-American woman to get elected to the New York state office. On Wednesday, she shared a meme on Elon Musk-owned X in which the incumbent Public Advocate Jumaane Williams can be seen passed out in bed, New York Post reported. The cartoon image also shows a social media quote from Williams that reads, 'Maaaaan, last batch edibles took me somewhere else". Next to Williams' cartoon is a schedule which lists only 'nap' on his agenda for the day. On the other side, Jenifer showed herself as a hard-working lady following a packed work schedule that starts at 7 AM. Alongside the meme, Jenifer wrote that their campaign has 'woke up Jumaane Williams," highlighting that he held at press conference at 11:55 AM. She dubbed it as his 'earliest appearance in recent memory." She added that even the 'Public Absentee" is forced to set an alarm when she is running for the post. The state Assembly member's soon went viral on the platform, with Opposition leaders calling her out for being 'racist". Another person criticised her for saying 'nonsensical or racist things," adding that they will continue to 'ignore her". Arvind Sooknanan, spokesperson for Jenifer's campaign, came out in support of the controversy and claimed that people criticising her were using the Public Advocate's own words against him. Sooknanan said they used Jumaane's own X post in the image and have reflected on something that 'New Yorkers already know". He later reminded Jumaane about how he worked from a 'remote" office and remained 'unresponsive and missing in action" during the last six years. Jenifer's post came after Mayor Eric Adams slammed Williams at an event earlier this week. He claimed that Williams wakes up at noon and even 'takes a nap until 2." He goes looking around the fort to make sure the guards are awake. And then he goes back and takes another nap. 'Then he looks at the press and says, 'My job for over $200,000 is to find a way to criticize Eric or something.'" The mayor, though, didn't pin Williams' alleged no-show record on being high. The campaign also doubled down, posting the meme again Thursday afternoon, and replying to one of Williams' social posts. 'It's f–ked up," said one city politician. An Honan Strategy Group poll found this week that Rajkumar was polling at 6 per cent of likely Dem voters, while Williams, who has barely campaigned, was comfortably at 51 per cent. About a third of voters are still up for grabs, according to the poll. First Published:
Indian Express
25-04-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
The slippery slope of political iconography
Earlier this month Brendan Carr, the chair of the Federal Communications Commission, decided to swap out his usual American flag lapel pin. Instead of the stars and stripes, he pinned a gold medallion in the shape of President Donald Trump's profile, about the size of a quarter, to his blue suit and wore it to meet with a Georgia congressman, Buddy Carter, and later to a meeting at the Justice Department. He then memorialized the meetings on the social platform X. The pin was noticed by Benny Johnson, a conservative YouTuber, who posted a shot of it on X along with the line 'Do you even understand the level of fit that Brendan Carr has?' to his 3.6 million followers. Carr reposted it. And so a mini social media moment was born. Rumors flew across the internet that Trump was requiring members of his administration to wear the pins. 'Fake news' wrote Steven Cheung, the White House communications director, in an email a few days later. Carr has not been seen wearing the pin since. Yet the mere fact that someone who worked for Trump thought it might be a good idea to display his boss's likeness on his lapel, no matter how briefly, is notable. Especially because it is not the only Trump likeness popping up in the administration. Trump's face also graces an example of what he has called the Trump 'Gold Card': a mock-up of the proposed green card for those willing to pay $5 million, which Trump unveiled the same day Carr modeled his Trump lapel pin and which Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said should come into effect in the next week or so. 'It's a real departure from the norm, especially because of the precedents,' said Richard Thompson Ford, a professor at Stanford Law School and the author of 'Dress Codes: How the Laws of Fashion Made History.' 'To the extent such symbolism matters, it portends a change. A shift from the veneration of the rule of law, to the veneration of an individual.' When asked why Carr wore the pin, and where he got it, a spokesperson for the FCC emailed back, 'Chairman Carr has focused on delivering great results for the American people.' Then he added, 'The New York Times has chosen to focus on … lapel pins.' However, lapel pins of all kinds, whether the flag pin, the Légion d'Honneur in France, the poppy in Britain or the multiple color-coded ribbons for different causes, have long been repositories of meaning. They sit at the knotty place where history, the culture of consumption and the power of merch meet. A Brief History of the Lapel Pin Lapel pins have long been beloved tools across the political spectrum. At the 2024 State of the Union address, Democrats wore lapel pins to show their support of abortion rights, to protest gun violence and police violence, or to support Ukraine, while Republican lawmakers sported pins paying homage to Laken Riley, the college student who was killed by a migrant. Because they are worn close to the heart, and on view for anyone to see, they have become de facto signs of value systems and allegiances. Not to mention 'a way to distinguish between the in group and the out group,' said Joshua Arthurs, an associate professor of history and museum studies at the University of Toronto. The pins have their roots in military culture, with its practice of wearing the insignia of rank and status on the front of the chest. In Benito Mussolini's Italy, for example, Arthurs said a wide variety of lapel pins was often on display, including '1919 pins' that differentiated original members of the fascist party from those who joined later, and who often wore pins with elaborate party insignia. But they became particularly potent in China under Mao Zedong, where wearing a lapel pin in the form of Mao's profile became a widespread sign of commitment. 'The person becomes the embodiment of the cause,' said Karl Gerth, a professor of Chinese Studies and history at the University of California, San Diego, and the author of 'Unending Capitalism: How Consumerism Negated China's Communist Revolution.' The implication being, he said, that loyalty to the state is loyalty to the person, or loyalty to the person is loyalty to the state. Such prominent symbols, Arthurs said, suggest familiar displays of patriotism shifting into something like a 'secular religion.' One built around a charismatic figure, the power of ritual and iconography. Or stuff. 'Clothing becomes very important,' Arthurs said, as 'a way to show you are a true believer' and a member of the tribe, whether or not it is officially required. This is part of the allure of the MAGA hat — and why Trump could sell off swatches of his mug shot suit like souvenirs. What's in a Face? Trump lapel pins are not particularly hard to get. One such gold-plated style is currently available on the official Trump 2024 store for $19.95, while another is on Amazon for $6.99; more than 300 of those pins have been sold in the past month, according to the e-commerce site. It's not hard to imagine why such a pin may seem attractive for anyone who has taken note of the amount of time Trump spends discussing appearance, and his dislike of what he considers improper dress (see his scolding of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for not wearing a suit for his Oval Office meeting). The president obviously both pays attention to and cares what those around him wear. Indeed, it does not seem like a coincidence that so many Republican officials, including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and House Speaker Mike Johnson, have adopted the de facto Trump uniform of blue suit, white shirt and red tie. It is also very clear that Trump loves gold (see the redecoration of the Oval Office). That he is concerned with his own likeness, as his recent complaints over a portrait that he believed was unflattering and that was briefly hung in the Colorado Capitol demonstrated. And that he values loyalty. What better way to show fealty than to wear a gold pin of his likeness? He does not have to actually instruct people to do so. They can figure it out all on their own. It's no different from young Bernie Sanders supporters getting tattoos of his face (as some proudly did after the 2016 campaign), or Barack Obama fans buying T-shirts with Shepard Fairey's Obama portrait on the chest — unless it becomes something more ubiquitous and bureaucratic. Which is where the gold card comes in. While presidents such as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln all have their likeness on the U.S. currency, that happened after they were either dead or at least out of office; in 1866, Congress passed a law that prohibited using the 'portrait or likeness of any living person' on legal tender. To have a leader put his face on an official instrument when the person is actually in power is, like the lapel pin, Ford said, 'a bad sign.' 'When Caesar put his face on a coin, it was a personal, rather than a civic, assertion of power,' Ford said. It was also when Rome moved from republic to empire. That is why Carr's pin matters. 'It's a reflection,' Ford said, 'of the mindset of someone working in the administration.' When that person is also the person charged with overseeing communications laws and regulations, it seems especially — well, pointed.
New York Times
22-04-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
The Slippery Slope of Political Iconography
Earlier this month Brendan Carr, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, decided to swap out his usual American flag lapel pin. Instead of the stars and stripes, he pinned a gold medallion in the shape of President Trump's profile, about the size of a quarter, to his blue suit and wore it to meet with a Georgia congressman, Buddy Carter, and later to a meeting at the Justice Department. He then memorialized the meetings on X. The pin was noticed by Benny Johnson, a conservative YouTuber, who posted a shot of it on X along with the line 'Do you even understand the level of fit that Brendan Carr has?' to his 3.6 million followers. Mr. Carr reposted it. And so a mini social media moment was born. Rumors flew across the internet that Mr. Trump was requiring members of his administration to wear the pins. 'Fake news' wrote Steven Cheung, the White House communications director, in an email a few days later. Mr. Carr has not been seen wearing the pin since. Yet the mere fact that someone who worked for Mr. Trump thought it might be a good idea to display his boss's likeness on his lapel, no matter how briefly, is notable. Especially because it is not the only Trump likeness currently popping up in the administration. Mr. Trump's face also graces an example of what he has called the Trump 'Gold Card': a mock-up of the proposed green card for those willing to pay $5 million, which Mr. Trump unveiled the same day Mr. Carr modeled his Trump lapel pin and which Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said should come into effect in the next week or so. 'It's a real departure from the norm, especially because of the precedents,' said Richard Thompson Ford, a professor at Stanford Law School and the author of 'Dress Codes: How the Laws of Fashion Made History.' 'To the extent such symbolism matters, it portends a change. A shift from the veneration of the rule of law, to the veneration of an individual.' When asked why Mr. Carr wore the pin, and where he got it, a spokesman for the F.C.C. emailed back, 'Chairman Carr has focused on delivering great results for the American people.' Then he added, 'The New York Times has chosen to focus on … lapel pins.' However, lapel pins of all kinds, whether the flag pin, the Légion d'Honneur in France, the poppy in Britain or the multiple color-coded ribbons for different causes, have long been repositories of meaning. They sit at the knotty place where history, the culture of consumption and the power of merch meet. A Brief History of the Lapel Pin Lapel pins have long been beloved tools across the political spectrum. At the 2024 State of the Union address, Democrats wore lapel pins to show their support of abortion rights, to protest gun violence and police violence, or to support Ukraine, while Republican lawmakers sported pins paying homage to Laken Riley, the college student who was killed by a migrant. Because they are worn close to the heart, and on view for anyone to see, they have become de facto signs of value systems and allegiances. Not to mention 'a way to distinguish between the in group and the out group,' said Joshua Arthurs, an associate professor of history and museum studies at the University of Toronto. The pins have their roots in military culture, with its practice of wearing the insignia of rank and status on the front of the chest. In Benito Mussolini's Italy, for example, Mr. Arthurs said a wide variety of lapel pins was often on display, including '1919 pins' that differentiated original members of the fascist party from those who joined later, and who often wore pins with elaborate party insignia. But they became particularly potent in China under Mao Zedong, where wearing a lapel pin in the form of Mao's profile became a widespread sign of commitment. 'The person becomes the embodiment of the cause,' said Karl Gerth, a professor of Chinese Studies and history at the University of California, San Diego, and the author of 'Unending Capitalism: How Consumerism Negated China's Communist Revolution.' The implication being, he said, that loyalty to the State is loyalty to the person, or loyalty to the person is loyalty to the state. Such prominent symbols, Mr. Arthurs said, suggest familiar displays of patriotism shifting into something like a 'secular religion.' One built around a charismatic figure, the power of ritual and iconography. Or stuff. 'Clothing becomes very important,' Mr. Arthurs said, as 'a way to show you are a true believer' and a member of the tribe, whether or not it is officially required. This is part of the allure of the MAGA hat — and why Mr. Trump could sell off swatches of his mug shot suit like souvenirs. Mr. Gerth called such items 'a way to show loyalty through consumption, one that spreads quickly.' It can be as simple as seeing one person wearing a pin, and, much as with any fashion trend, feeling nervous that if you are not also wearing the pin, you are not demonstrating your own fealty or belonging. In the Carr case, 'wearing this new pin communicates a higher level of commitment to President Trump,' said Ron Bonjean, a Republican strategist and a founder of ROKK, a public affairs firm. 'He will definitely stand out among political appointees as the first one to wear it and likely receive praise from the President.' If that happens, Mr. Bonjean continued, 'it could cause a wave of administration staff and MAGA loyalists to scramble and begin wearing the pins immediately.' What's in a Face? Trump lapel pins are not particularly hard to get. One such gold-plated style is currently available on the official Trump 2024 store for $19.95, while another is on Amazon for $6.99; more than 300 of those pins have been sold in the last month, according to the e-commerce site. It's not hard to imagine why such a pin may seem attractive for anyone who has taken note of the amount of time Mr. Trump spends discussing appearance, and his dislike of what he considers improper dress (see his scolding of President Volodymyr Zelensky for not wearing a suit for his Oval Office meeting). The president obviously both pays attention to and cares what those around him wear. Indeed, it does not seem like a coincidence that so many Republican officials, including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and House Speaker Mike Johnson, have adopted the de facto Trump uniform of blue suit, white shirt and red tie. It is also very clear that Mr. Trump loves gold (see the redecoration of the Oval Office). That he is concerned with his own likeness, as his recent complaints over a portrait that he believed was unflattering and that was briefly hung in the Colorado State Capitol demonstrated. And that he values loyalty. What better way to show fealty than to wear a gold pin of his likeness? He does not have to actually instruct people to do so. They can figure it out all on their own. It's no different than young Bernie Sanders supporters getting tattoos of his face (as some proudly did after the 2016 campaign), or Obama fans buying T-shirts with Shepard Fairey's Obama portrait on the chest — unless it becomes something more ubiquitous and bureaucratic. Which is where the gold card comes in. While presidents such as Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln all have their likeness on the U.S. currency, that happened after they were either dead or at least out of office; in 1866, Congress passed a law that prohibited using the 'portrait or likeness of any living person' on legal tender. To have a leader put his face on an official instrument when the person is actually in power is, like the lapel pin, Mr. Ford said, 'a bad sign.' 'When Caesar put his face on a coin, it was a personal, rather than a civic, assertion of power,' Mr. Ford said. It was also when Rome moved from republic to empire. That is why Mr. Carr's pin matters. 'It's a reflection,' Mr. Ford said, 'of the mind-set of someone working in the administration.' When that person is also the person charged with overseeing communications laws and regulations, it seems especially — well, pointed.
