Sen. Bill Cassidy signed an amicus brief. That's Latin for "I want my name on this too." The Louisiana Republican joined others to call a Justice Department fund labeled "anti-weaponization" a dire threat. The fund designed to prevent weaponization of the Justice Department is itself weaponization, according to the brief. This is like calling your anti-virus software a virus. Which, to be fair, Norton basically is.
Cassidy looked at a government program with "anti-weaponization" in the title and thought: weaponization. Brilliant. Next he'll sign onto a brief calling the Department of Defense a dire offensive threat. Call the fire department arsonists. Accuse the Treasury of being broke. The man found a way to make being against something sound exactly like being for it while somehow meaning neither.
The Justice Department created this fund after concerns about politicization. Then politicians immediately politicized the fund created to address politicization. Beautiful. We've reached recursion levels previously only seen in Christopher Nolan films and terms-of-service agreements. Cassidy presumably read the entire brief, which runs about as long as a CVS receipt and makes about as much sense.
Amicus briefs exist so lawmakers can attach their names to legal positions without doing actual legal work. It's the participation trophy of jurisprudence. Cassidy gets to tell voters he fought the dire threat without defining what the threat threatens or how dire we're talking. Is this dire like student loans or dire like an asteroid? The brief doesn't specify. Probably because "moderately concerning but politically expedient" doesn't fit on a press release.
The fund's purpose involves protecting against government overreach. Cassidy's brief argues the fund protecting against overreach is itself overreach. We've entered an Escher painting of bureaucratic reasoning. Next week he'll argue that arguing is unconstitutional and prove it by arguing. The week after that he'll introduce legislation banning legislation. Someone check if Louisiana's water supply contains lead or if this is just what happens when you let senators have opinions.
The greatest threat to anti-weaponization remains weaponized opposition to anti-weaponization, which Cassidy weaponized by opposing it in writing.
Photo by Brett Jordan on Unsplash
Leave a Comment