Zack Ford

@zackford

Press/Editorial: AFJustice Formerly: ThinkProgress (RIP). Queer/cis, atheist, SJW, pianist, gaymer, IC alumni, union member. Opinions my own. (He/Him) 🏳️‍🌈🖖

421 Siguiendo3521 Seguidores2905 Publicaciones

YouTube Bluesky

gay

¿Es tu perfil?Reclámalo y zackford.dirty.social es tuyo.Reclamar perfil

Zack Ford@zackford· Jul 3

It's 10:03 on Friday... Just triple checking there's no news from the Supreme Court. Right? ...Right?

Zack Ford@zackford· Jun 30

Between Roberts's reliance on Johnson yesterday and Thomas's reliance on Dred Scott in his dissent today, it really feels like the Civil War never ended.

Zack Ford@zackford· Jun 30

Editor's note: NPR retracts story

Editors Note: This story has been taken down. It was published in error.

Zack Ford@zackford· Jun 23

Zack Ford@zackford· Jun 10

Oh hey, it's another Trump judicial nominee who won't say who won the 2020 election.

Zack Ford@zackford· Jun 8

Mother!!! #TonyAwards

Zack Ford@zackford· Jun 6

I see a Facebook page that needs an update!

Zack Ford@zackford· May 28

Democrats have so tolerated the Republican demonization of transgender people that we're at the point that the right just now calls someone trans as an attack.

Zack Ford@zackford· May 22

Zack Ford@zackford· Apr 29

Here is @afj.org's statement on today's historically disastrous ruling in Callais v. Louisiana: afj.org/article/the-... @rachelrossi.bsky.social:

Alliance for Justice President Rachel Rossi issued the following statement:

“With this decision, Chief Justice Roberts has completed his campaign to eliminate the bedrock principle that all people have equal access to the polls and to representation in our democratic republic. In effectively overturning the Voting Rights Act, the Roberts Court has ensured that no law can protect against efforts to deny Black voters and other marginalized groups a voice at the ballot box. As it did in its decision against affirmative action, the Court has perverted logic itself to suggest that simple efforts to protect against racial discrimination are somehow, themselves, ‘racist.’ Like the racist literacy tests and poll taxes of the Jim Crow era, states are once again free to discriminate under the guise of neutrality.

“We are left to wonder if the Fifteenth Amendment is even enforceable or if any effort to ensure racial equality in our elections would be similarly shot down by this Court. We must face the reality that this Court cannot be trusted to uphold the Constitution and steel ourselves to enact reforms that will course-correct the third branch for the sake of our democracy.”

Zack Ford@zackford· Apr 29

Racial discrimination is over! Put your umbrellas away!

Zack Ford@zackford· Apr 29

According to Alito, a state can partisan gerrymander even if it creates racial discrimination. An alternative that doesn't racially discriminate is no help if it doesn't still partisan gerrymander.

Zack Ford@zackford· Apr 21

We must protect nonprofits like SPLC from a weaponized DOJ. @rachelrossi.bsky.social at @afj.org: afj.org/article/doj-...

Alliance for Justice President Rachel Rossi issued the following statement:

“Time and again, this administration has demonstrated its eagerness to stand on the wrong side of history. First, we saw Trump pardon January 6 insurrectionists and then try to paint anyone anti-fascist as a ‘terrorist,’ and now, he’s directly attacking an organization that works to resist hate and extremism. What conclusion can be drawn other than that Trump and his administration are on the side of fascism, hate, and extremism?

“Nonprofits are a vital part of our democracy, working to protect peoples’ rights, deliver critical services, help people participate in democracy, and make our communities safer. Nonprofits represent the voice of the people. Threats to silence them threaten us all.

“As a former DOJ senior official, I have deep respect for the duty of the DOJ to protect the American people and administer justice fairly. Instead, Trump has conscripted the DOJ to advance his extremist agenda. We stand with the SPLC and their important work to oppose hate, and we deplore such obviously corrupt efforts to weaponize the DOJ and target valiant nonprofits with intimidation — or worse. This is the latest alarm in a cacophony of alarms that our democracy is failing, and Congress must act to protect these organizations.”

Zack Ford@zackford· Apr 19

Thank you Judge Kasubhai! During his confirmation process, Kasubhai was attacked by Republican senators for his courtroom policies respecting trans and nonbinary people's pronouns. We need and deserve judges who respect all people for who they are.

Pronouns and Privilege
By the Honorable Mustafa Kasubhai (he/him)
ovid-19 forced most court hearings to go
remote. Midway through the shutdown,
I had the chance to empanel a grand
jury after the previous one termed out. Excited
about finally finding ways to bring people
back safely into the courthouse, we summoned
70 potential grand jurors and placed them in
three courtrooms to conduct voir dire. I was in
my element. Engaging with the public, asking
questions about their ability to serve as a grand
juror, answering questions about service and the
18-month obligation. Speaking with potential
jurors is a prime opportunity to share the importance of jury service to our judiciary and our
democracy. As I asked questions and moved on
to the next juror, I expressed my appreciation for
their attendance and politely said, as I had for
the last 13 years of judicial service, “Thank you,
sir” or “Thank you, ma’am.” My last “Thank you,
sir” was met with “and I’m not a sir.”
The time-honored expression of respect in
gendered terms utterly failed. I had screwed up,
even after having months before broadly incorporated practices in my chambers encouraging
parties and counsel to identify their pronouns and
to find ways to
speak in gender-neutral
terms, precisely to prevent
incidents like
that. The incident demonstrates at least
a double harm
to the LGBTQ+
community.
The first is the
decision someo n e m i g h t
make not to
speak out and to remain silent, which contributes to invisibility and diminishment. Second, if
someone decides to speak out, they are doing
so without knowing what costly consequence
they might bear. Both harms keep our courts
from being accessible. Moreover, my intention
to foster a more accessible space was insufficient
to overcome the momentum of my practiced
conventions.
I wrote this essay from my perspective as a
cisgender male and as a judge in the District of...

Oregon. I am committed to finding ways
to increase access to the courts. I offer
this essay up as a description, not a prescription, of my own continuing journey,
with all of its stumblings and fumblings,
toward equity.
Several years ago, I first noticed faculty
at the University of Oregon School of Law
sending me emails with their pronouns
in signature lines. At the time I thought
I was tuned in to what was happening
in diversity and inclusion, although
I’ve come to appreciate that thinking I
know what it’s all about is the first sign
that I don’t know nearly enough. I was
curious and skeptical. My immediate
reaction those many years ago was that
this practice seemed performative and
unnecessary. After all, I’d known these
faculty members for years, and I thought
I had been aware of their gender identity
and thus their pronouns, hadn’t I?
Over time, my first reaction slowly
transformed from a skepticism of pronoun identification to an appreciation
of its importance, but it was still not
something I saw myself doing. It was
something the newer generation of
lawyers and professionals employed. I, on
the other hand, was already a judge, and
my time for this kind of change was past.
Also, employing my pronouns felt both
inauthentic to me and simultaneously a
bit too political for a judge. My excuses
included that surely by now people
knew my gender and pronoun usage,
and I did not see any other judge using
pronouns in this way, substantiating my
conclusion that perhaps it was just too
political. Let the next generation carry
the water on this one. When I reflect on
my thoughts about pronouns, the image
of a wet, slippery fish writhing about and
struggling for a way out comes to mind.
I was that fish.
I have the luxury of a certain privilege
as a judge and a cisgender man. While
that privilege is tempered in some ways
by my experiences as a person of color, the
privilege is still quite real. My judicial position affords me the insulation from being
confronted with my sh…

Now, if you receive an email from me,
in the automated signature line and next
to the District of Oregon seal you will
find my pronouns (he/him) by my name.
Once I started using my pronouns in my
signature line, my courtroom deputy and
law clerks began including their pronouns
in their email signature lines, without
any direction from me. But how many
litigants, witnesses, or lawyers actually
receive an email from my staff or me? I
searched for ways to do more.
On the District of Oregon court website
each judge has our own section in which
we can include information unique to
our chamber’s practices. I had been on
the District Court bench for over a year
and a half, and I had yet to upload any
information to my section. This was the
perfect opportunity to formalize my communications regarding, among several
other practices, the use of pronouns. My
courtroom rules provide:
The parties and counsel are encouraged to advise the Court of their pronouns. People appearing before this
Court may do so in writing and when
appearing for conferences, hearings
or trials. Attorneys are encouraged
to identify their pronouns in their
signature lines when submitting
documents for filing. All parties and
counsel are instructed to address
each other in all written documents
and court proceedings by those pronouns previously identified.
The same written advice is provided in
my case management and trial management orders, in Rule 16 conference
scheduling orders, and in my instruction
letter outlining procedures for settlement
conferences.
The changes I’ve made are far from
flawless. For example, the first iteration of
the above-quoted language encouraged
parties and counsel to “advise the Court
of their preferred pronouns.” Not long
after I had uploaded this information
last summer, I received a call from Lake
Perriguey. He had seen the changes to
my website section, and in a kind and
courageous way he proceeded to explain to me that “preferred pronouns”
evokes the idea that a person’s…

Zack Ford@zackford· Apr 15

Here is @afj.org's statement on today's hearing for Justin Smith: afj.org/article/just...

Alliance for Justice President Rachel Rossi issued the following statement:

“Justin Smith demonstrated today that he cannot be trusted to uphold the rule of law. He has dedicated his career to undermining the Constitution to support Trump’s authoritarian behavior and to hold back the advancement of civil rights. There is every reason to believe that this is exactly how he will act as a judge, and he offered nothing in today’s hearing to suggest otherwise.

“Trump’s motivations for appointing his personal attorneys like Justin Smith to our federal courts are obvious. In the short term, he’s hoping to stack the court with judges loyal to him and his unlawful actions above all else. In the long term, he’s hoping these judges will continue to enshrine his undemocratic MAGA legacy for generations to come.

“Smith is not the first nor the last of Trump’s attorneys he’s trying to appoint to the bench. We’ve already seen Emil Bove use his position on an appeals court to prop up Trump’s unlawful behavior and Matthew Schwartz is waiting in the wings. Trump’s nefarious plot is obvious, and the Senate must ensure Smith’s confirmation does not move forward.”

Zack Ford@zackford· Mar 31

Here is @afj.org's statement on today's egregious anti-LGBTQ+ Supreme Court ruling: afj.org/article/supr... @rachelrossi.bsky.social:

Alliance for Justice President Rachel Rossi issued the following statement:

“Today’s decision is yet another harmful setback for the LGBTQ+ community and for the health care of everybody. As in its 2018 case about crisis pregnancy centers’ anti-abortion propaganda, the Court reasserts its view that speech must be so ‘free’ that medical professionals can lie to their clients — even when it’s harmful and conflicts with best practices for professional care. This flies in the face of well-established precedent recognizing a valid interest in regulating speech that endangers others. The validity of LGBTQ+ identities is not open to debate, nor is the inevitable trauma many children will experience without the protection of laws like Colorado’s. We deserve justices who care about the context of harm and the importance of laws that protect us from it.”

Zack Ford@zackford· Mar 23

Zack Ford@zackford· Feb 23

A beautifully snowy evening in DC! Some sidewalks are getting slushy and slick so don't go out if you can help it!

Zack Ford@zackford· Feb 20

Kagan getting sassy with Gorsuch in a footnote. She's no convert to the bullshit "major questions doctrine."

Zack Ford@zackford· Feb 10

Zack Ford@zackford· Feb 3

Don't be fooled by Trump's spats with Leonard Leo, as we wrote last year: www.democracydocket.com/opinion/trum...

Zack Ford@zackford· Jan 20

I'm glad not to spend time on Twitter anymore. It's funny when you take a step back to just watch randos shout "SOROS!" and think that delegitimizes whatever you say after.

Zack Ford@zackford· Jan 19

This is the energy we need to see matched by Democrats in the U.S. Senate. No more compromise, no more appeal to bipartisanship, no more "respect" for "friends" across the aisle.

Tweet from 81-year old Virginia State Senate Leader L. Louise Lucas that reads: I have the utmost respect for Senator Kaine and Senator Warner but we do not need “coaching” on redistricting coming from a cuck chair in the corner. How about you all stay focused on the fascist in the White House and let us handle redistricting in Virginia. 10-1

Zack Ford@zackford· Dec 21

At the bus stop just now, a woman standing there caught my attention and said, "Hey, have you ever seen clouds like that?" And I heard myself say, "Wow, no I haven't. They look like chiseled abs."

Zack Ford@zackford· Nov 20

Did I take a vacation day to go to a Wicked double feature with my bestie? Yes, yes I did.

Zack Ford@zackford· Nov 15

Y'all know we can't just "move on" from this, right? We have to very intentionally correct for it.

Zack Ford@zackford· Nov 7

There's nothing more feminist than defending the most conservative vision of a woman's place, says Amy Coney Barrett. 🤮 She sounds JUST LIKE the tradwives I see on TikTok. www.politico.com/news/2025/11...

Zack Ford@zackford· Nov 6

Important footnote from the Fifth Circuit:

We have genuine doubt, however, that pulsing prosthetic breasts in front of people, putting prosthetic breasts in people’s faces, and being spanked by audience members are actually constitutionally protected—especially in the presence of minors. While nude dancing receives some constitutional protection, “intentional contact between a nude dancer and a bar patron is conduct beyond the expressive scope of the dancing itself. The conduct at that point has overwhelmed any expressive strains it may contain. That the physical contact occurs while in the course of protected activity does not bring it within the scope of the First Amendment.” Hang On, Inc. v. City of Arlington, 65 F.3d 1248, 1253 (5thCir. 1995). “It is possible to find some kernel of expression in almost every activity a person undertakes . . . but such a kernel is not sufficient to bring the activity within the protection of the First Amendment.” Id. (quoting City of Dallas v. Stanglin, 490 U.S. 19, 25 (1989)). Even though the performers here are not fully nude, Hang On’s reasoning is persuasive. At a minimum, Hang On confirms that each action in a performance is not necessarily protected even if the performance as a whole may receive some constitutional protection.

Zack Ford@zackford· Oct 30

They don't know that they're the orcs. 🤦

Zack Ford@zackford· Oct 17

Trump's McCarthyist immigration goon Joseph Edlow consistently wears an American flag pin with SOMETHING on it, but I can't make it out in any of the pics or videos. Does anybody recognize what it might be?