'Project 2029' Must Be More Radical Than 'Project 2025' | Josh Orton | TMR
YouTube · sjuZ7lU-c4s
Quick Read
Summary
Takeaways
- ❖Project 2029 must be as radical and institutionally focused as Project 2025, not just an amalgam of past Democratic proposals.
- ❖The Supreme Court, particularly the Roberts majority, has consistently consolidated power for the already powerful and wealthy, often with intellectual dishonesty.
- ❖Public opinion polls show widespread disapproval of key Supreme Court decisions, including Citizens United and voting rights rollbacks.
- ❖Court expansion is a constitutional and historically proven method of reform, unlike term limits which the current court would likely strike down.
- ❖Democratic senators often hesitate to challenge the judiciary due to an elite legal culture that values 'neutrality' and 'bipartisanship' over ideological transparency.
- ❖Trump's judicial nominees are subjected to a political litmus test regarding the 2020 election, January 6th, and a potential third term, which many refuse to answer directly.
- ❖The 'blue slip' norm, a Senate courtesy for judicial nominations, has been inconsistently applied, with Republicans disregarding it when convenient while Democrats often uphold it.
- ❖There's a potential for Trump's 'crony' Supreme Court nominees to fail if they lack conservative legal credentials and face opposition from moderate Republicans or those facing tough elections.
Insights
1Project 2029 Must Be Radically Structural
Josh Orton argues that any Democratic 'Project 2029' plan must be as radical and focused on institutional reimagining as the conservative 'Project 2025.' He criticizes establishment Democrats for proposing incremental policy changes (e.g., Medicare buy-in) instead of bold, structural reforms necessary to counter the right's aggressive agenda.
Orton states, 'Project 2029 can't have a Medicare buy-in as an option...it has to be radical...it has to mirror the how radical project 2025 was because project 2025 was a radical institutional reimagining.'
2Supreme Court Consolidates Power and Lacks Intellectual Honesty
The Roberts majority, including Justices Alito and Thomas, has systematically consolidated power among the already powerful (executive, Republican Party, billionaire class) and frequently uses intellectually dishonest justifications for its rulings. This behavior has led to widespread public dissatisfaction.
Orton states, 'they've been consolidating power among the already powerful for a couple for a generation or more now...they've done this over and over again and then lied about it.' He cites Alito's decision rolling back Voting Rights Act provisions as an example.
3Court Expansion is the Viable Reform, Not Term Limits
Demand Justice advocates for Supreme Court expansion as the primary reform because it is constitutionally sound and has historical precedent. Term limits, while popular, would likely be struck down by the current conservative court, rendering them ineffective.
Orton explains, 'our position has always been expansion. It's constitutional, facially constitutional. It's been done before.' He adds, 'if you think this Roberts Court is corrupt...they're not going to uphold term limits. They're just not.'
4Public Disapproves of Supreme Court Decisions
Polling data indicates that many Supreme Court decisions, beyond just high-profile ones like Roe v. Wade, are deeply unpopular across the ideological spectrum. This includes Citizens United, decisions affecting labor rights, and even a case allowing gay conversion therapy.
Orton notes, 'people actually have heard of a lot of this not the names of the cases, but the things the Supreme Court has done and they they're really unpopular...everybody knows Citizens United is unpopular and our finding is it's actually the most unpopular across every ideology.'
5Trump's Litmus Test for Judicial Nominees
Trump has established a political litmus test for judicial nominees, requiring them to deny that Joe Biden won the 2020 election, that January 6th was an attack on the Capitol, and that Trump cannot run for a third term. Nominees who fail this test risk their appointments.
Orton states, 'Trump is using these two issues as his political litmus test. You cannot be nominated for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench if you don't either earnestly believe this or two, are willing to throw away all of your professional credibility in order to lie for the president.'
6The Strategic Vulnerability of Trump's 'Crony' Nominees
If Trump nominates individuals who are perceived as unqualified or personal loyalists rather than traditional conservative legal figures, they could face significant opposition. This could lead to a rare defeat for a Supreme Court nominee, especially if Republican senators facing re-election or those alienated by Trump choose to oppose.
Orton discusses 'the it category of people that Trump wants on the court who shockingly...would be the least credentialed by the conservative movement.' He suggests such a pick 'may actually go down' if Trump 'chooses dumbly.'
Lessons
- Call your Democratic senator to express that you are paying attention to judicial nominations and expect them to oppose Trump's 'crony' judges, especially those who fail basic democratic litmus tests.
- Visit demandjustice.org to stay informed and prepare for potential Supreme Court vacancies, including accessing whip lists and strategies to challenge nominees.
- Encourage Democratic senators to challenge judicial nominees who cannot affirm basic facts about the 2020 election, January 6th, or presidential term limits, as this exposes their political motivations.
Quotes
"If we're going to put together a project 2029, it has to be radical in a I would say a just way, but it has to mirror the how radical project 2025 was because project 2025 was a radical institutional reimagining or you know, imagining of its destruction of the government."
"There is no such thing as a neutral Supreme Court justice. They all have ideologies. Let's just be transparent about it and decide which ideology we would like to have on the justice."
"Trump is using these two issues as his political litmus test. You cannot be nominated for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench if you don't either earnestly believe this or two, are willing to wait throw away all of your professional credibility in order to lie for the president."
"Any agenda of a next Democratic president is going to run into the buzzsaw of the Roberts majority unless there is radical change to the court."
Q&A
Recent Questions
Related Episodes
All Roads Lead To the South: Nat’l Day Of Action For Voting Rights | Mass Rally | Montgomery, AL
"A mass rally in Montgomery, Alabama, ignites 'Freedom Summer 2026' to combat the Supreme Court's decimation of Black political power and demand unprecedented voter mobilization across the South."
Cory Booker GOES OFF on Trump and Democrats’ Tax Plan
"Senator Cory Booker delivers a passionate critique of Trump's administration and Congressional inaction, while advocating for bold Democratic policies, including a controversial tax plan that would eliminate federal income tax for most Americans."
They’re talking about 1 to 2 years in Iran
"David Pakman dissects the escalating Iran conflict, the controversial White House ballroom project, and internal political fractures, arguing that Trump's erratic leadership and self-interest are driving concerning national and international developments."
Contested Primary Elections. Facebook Marketplace Shooting. Hey Black Girl Affirmations#TheBreakdown
"This episode explores a Georgia lawsuit challenging a new election law, highlights a community-driven real estate project building Black wealth, and features initiatives empowering Black women and girls."