Going into 2026 and 2028 it’s time for — essential for — Democrats to make clear that the current Supreme Court will have to reformed (expanded in number, reformed in structure) to allow popular government to continue in the United States. This is not so much a litmus test (though it should be that too) as a precondition for any other promise to be credible.

We’ve noted this in the emails members have received, but since we’ve gotten a lot of questions about it: tickets for individual nights will go on sale this coming week. We know a lot of people can’t make it in for both nights (Thursday and Friday). So for those who just want to attend the show Thursday evening or the anniversary party Friday evening, those tickets will go on sale this coming week.

I also want to take a moment to thank everyone who came out to our event with STAT News Thursday night in Cambridge (Boston). I loved the venue and it was a chance for me to finally meet a lot of longtime readers from Boston and the greater New England region. A bunch of members from Vermont, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, etc. were there. (There may have been some from Maine. But no one told me they were from Maine.) The venue was really great, I thought, and I had a great mini-discussion with Rick Berke, co-founder and executive editor of STAT News. (That was the “content” for this event before we got on to the happy hour proper.) Let me thank especially Allegra Kirkland and Christine Frapech as well as the rest of our team for putting the Boston event together.

We’ll update you when tickets for each individual night of the anniversary celebration go on sale.

As I’ve written a few times, we can’t over-read any single move in the broad contest over big societal institutions obeying or resisting Trump administration diktats. But Sinclair Broadcasting just announced they’re ending their “preemption” of the Jimmy Kimmel show. Even their own statement seems to make clear that while they asked for concessions from ABC/Disney they didn’t get any.

As we hurtle toward an almost inevitable government shutdown, I want to note one part of the discussion I’ve seen among commentators. This is a bit in the weeds but I think it’s worth discussing. Some writers say that it’s actually a mistake for Democrats to make any policy demands in the budget standoff. So health care, pushing back on ICE, standing up for democracy … regardless of the specific demand, it’s a mistake. I noticed Bill Scher making this argument today in The Washington Monthly. I’ve seen TPM alum Brian Beutler in his Off Message substack newsletter. And these are only a couple of examples.

The argument goes like this.

These shutdown standoffs are technical budgetary questions. The side that is making policy demands is basically taking the budget hostage to extract extraneous policy concessions. Based on the evidence of the last 20-30 years of history, that side is the one who gets blamed for the shutdown because they’re “taking the budget hostage” or introducing extraneous demands even if those demands are good ones on the merits or even supported by the public. Beutler focuses on the “hostage taking” metaphor. Scher puts it this way:

Every past attempt to use government shutdowns to extract policy concessions has failed, even when the policy demands are politically popular, because shutdowns make people forget what you have to say. Public attention shifts to how shutdowns hurt average Americans and how one political party is willing to harm constituents to play political games. Once public opinion quickly turns, the shutdown agitators invariably realize the shutdown failed to provide negotiating leverage and eventually cave.