← Back to the statement
Statement grade
The average of Signal, Relevance, Reasoning and Clarity is 62. The grade is held to 30, 30 above Relevance. Reasoning rests on 2 conclusions, too few to hold the grade down. 30 / 100, held down by Relevance
Signal
55 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Relevance
0 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Reasoning
93 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Respect
–
Not scored Viewing ↓
Clarity
100 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Thanks 2% Procedure 5% Positioning 35% Reasoning 7% Claims 50%
Structure · 18 steps
Claims · 3
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Thanks · 7 words I thank the gentleman for yielding time, Thanks Procedure · 8 words and I rise in opposition to this resolution. Procedure Positioning · 55 words For decades, MAGA Republicans have systematically chipped away at the impartiality of our third branch. They have already delegitimized our judiciary, yet they now stand before the American people pretending to be guardians of judicial integrity. Today’s blatant attempt to rewrite history would be laughable if the consequences were not so dangerous for our democracy, Positioning Procedure · 3 words but history matters. Procedure Positioning · 12 words The American people deserve to understand how we got to this moment. Positioning Reasoning · 21 words To understand how we get here, we must follow both the money and the machinery behind the modern conservative legal movement. Claims · 105 words The Roberts Court is the culmination of a decades-long crusade by Republicans to concentrate power in the hands of the few at the expense of the many by packing the United States Supreme Court and the lower Federal courts as well.3 Wealthy donors and corporate interests led by The Federalist Society spent billions of dollars to pack the judiciary with rightwing, conservative, corporate, polluting-serving judges and justices, 1 and nowhere is the success of this decades-long Court-packing effort more visible than at the Supreme Court where a carefully curated, appointed, and conservative supermajority now delivers the conservative outcomes this movement spent billions of dollars to achieve, Procedure · 4 words and achieve they did. Procedure Claims · 42 words In the last several years, the Roberts Court opened the floodgates to unlimited dark money in our political system, empowering billionaires and oligarchs and other powerful special interests to accomplish through the Supreme Court what they can’t accomplish through the legislative branch, Reasoning · 11 words and that is to drown out the voices of ordinary Americans. Procedure · 5 words Abraham Lincoln once said that: Procedure Claims · 10 words ``This government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.’’2 Positioning · 67 words Yet that seems to be the vision for America that Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Alito, and the other MAGA majority members on the Court believe. Where some enjoy easy access to the ballot box while others are forced to overcome legal barriers, this is not America. They want to make it such that the voices of those who look like Justice Thomas are quieter. Positioning Claims · 66 words Our Nation is now in Jim Crow 2.0. We are a nation where the right to vote can, once again, be diluted, restricted, or simply ignored and where the voices of rich and powerful people carry more weight than the voice of ordinary Americans; but, particularly, Americans who look like Clarence Thomas, who no longer have the equal opportunity to elect the Representatives of their choice. Positioning · 22 words The American people deserve a judiciary that serves our democracy, not a narrow ideological agenda that only benefits the rich and powerful. Positioning Off point Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 4 words I oppose this resolution. Procedure
At a glance
Lost points for Off point ×25 Positioning ×10 Procedure ×5 Thanks Off topic None of this speech addressed the bill under debate and what it would change.
Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.
What the tags mean →
Signal · 55
16 of 41 deductions are Signal
Signal checks whether every part makes a point, gives a reason, or asks for action. A low score means the speaker filled time with fluff, pleasantries, or attacks.
Thanks Thanks and tributes. What the tags mean → “I thank the gentleman for yielding time,” Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
Procedure Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business. What the tags mean → “and I rise in opposition to this resolution.” Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “For decades, MAGA Republicans have systematically chipped away at the impartiality of our third branch.” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “They have already delegitimized our judiciary,” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “yet they now stand before the American people pretending to be guardians of judicial integrity.” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “Today’s blatant attempt to rewrite history would be laughable if the consequences were not so dangerous for our democracy,” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Procedure Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business. What the tags mean → “but history matters.” Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “The American people deserve to understand how we got to this moment.” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Procedure Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business. What the tags mean → “and achieve they did.” Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Procedure Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business. What the tags mean → “Abraham Lincoln once said that:” Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “Yet that seems to be the vision for America that Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Alito,” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “and the other MAGA majority members on the Court believe.” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “Where some enjoy easy access to the ballot box while others are forced to overcome legal barriers, this is not America.” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “They want to make it such that the voices of those who look like Justice Thomas are quieter.” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “The American people deserve a judiciary that serves our democracy, not a narrow ideological agenda that only benefits the rich and powerful.” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Procedure Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business. What the tags mean → “I oppose this resolution.” Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Relevance · 0
25 of 41 deductions are Relevance
Relevance checks whether the speaker stays on topic and answers the question asked. A low score means the speaker dodged the issue. Measured against the bill under debate.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “For decades, MAGA Republicans have systematically chipped away at the impartiality of our third branch.” An attack on MAGA Republicans rather than an argument about the nine-justice amendment.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “They have already delegitimized our judiciary,” An accusation about the other party’s record, not about the resolution under debate.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “yet they now stand before the American people pretending to be guardians of judicial integrity.” A political point about opponents’ conduct, not about the bill.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “Today’s blatant attempt to rewrite history would be laughable if the consequences were not so dangerous for our democracy,” Attacks the other side’s motives instead of addressing the amendment.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “but history matters.” A rhetorical pivot into a history lesson, not an argument on the bill.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “The American people deserve to understand how we got to this moment.” Announces a digression into background rather than addressing the resolution.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “To understand how we get here, we must follow both the money and the machinery behind the modern conservative legal movement.” Sets up an attack on the conservative legal movement, not the bill’s merits.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “The Roberts Court is the culmination of a decades-long crusade by Republicans to concentrate power in the hands of the few at the expense of the many by packing the United States Supreme Court and the lower Federal courts as well.” Accuses Republicans of court-packing, a political charge in place of an argument on the amendment.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “Wealthy donors and corporate interests led by The Federalist Society spent billions of dollars to pack the judiciary with rightwing, conservative, corporate, polluting-serving judges and justices,” Attack on donors and the Federalist Society, unrelated to whether the Court should be fixed at nine.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “and nowhere is the success of this decades-long Court-packing effort more visible than at the Supreme Court where a carefully curated, appointed,” Continues the court-packing accusation rather than addressing the resolution.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “and conservative supermajority now delivers the conservative outcomes this movement spent billions of dollars to achieve,” Describes the Court’s ideology, not the amendment being debated.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “and achieve they did.” A rhetorical flourish continuing the attack, not an argument on the bill.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “In the last several years, the Roberts Court opened the floodgates to unlimited dark money in our political system, empowering billionaires and oligarchs and other powerful special interests to accomplish through the Supreme Court what they can’t accomplish through the legislative branch,” Criticizes campaign-finance rulings, which is not what the resolution concerns.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “and that is to drown out the voices of ordinary Americans.” Continues the dark-money critique rather than addressing the amendment.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “Abraham Lincoln once said that:” Introduces a Lincoln quotation as part of the political attack, not an argument on the bill.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “``This government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.’’” The quoted line is used for the attack on the Court, not on the resolution.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “Yet that seems to be the vision for America that Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Alito,” Names individual Justices as part of the attack rather than addressing the amendment.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “and the other MAGA majority members on the Court believe.” Continues the attack on the Court’s majority, not the bill.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “Where some enjoy easy access to the ballot box while others are forced to overcome legal barriers, this is not America.” Commentary on voting access, unrelated to the nine-justice question.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “They want to make it such that the voices of those who look like Justice Thomas are quieter.” A charge about Justice Thomas and voting, not about the resolution.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “Our Nation is now in Jim Crow 2.0.” A sweeping political claim about the country, not an argument on the bill.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “We are a nation where the right to vote can, once again, be diluted, restricted,” Commentary on voting rights, not the amendment under debate.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “or simply ignored and where the voices of rich and powerful people carry more weight than the voice of ordinary Americans;” Continues the voting-rights critique rather than addressing the resolution.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “but, particularly, Americans who look like Clarence Thomas, who no longer have the equal opportunity to elect the Representatives of their choice.” Further voting-rights commentary unrelated to the bill.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “The American people deserve a judiciary that serves our democracy, not a narrow ideological agenda that only benefits the rich and powerful.” A general statement about what the judiciary should be, not an argument on fixing the Court at nine Justices.
Reasoning · 93
0 of 41 deductions are Reasoning
Reasoning checks for sound logic and solid support for any conclusion. A low score means the speaker made unsupported leaps or used weak arguments.
Nothing lost points.
Conclusions found · 2
Conclusion “and I rise in opposition to this resolution.”
Because “The Roberts Court is the culmination of a decades-long crusade by Republicans to concentrate power in the hands of the few at the expense of the many by packing the United States Supreme Court and the lower Federal courts as well.”
“Wealthy donors and corporate interests led by The Federalist Society spent billions of dollars to pack the judiciary with rightwing, conservative, corporate, polluting-serving judges and justices,”
Conclusion “The American people deserve a judiciary that serves our democracy, not a narrow ideological agenda that only benefits the rich and powerful.”
Because “The Roberts Court is the culmination of a decades-long crusade by Republicans to concentrate power in the hands of the few at the expense of the many by packing the United States Supreme Court and the lower Federal courts as well.”
“or simply ignored and where the voices of rich and powerful people carry more weight than the voice of ordinary Americans;”
Respect · no score
Not checked: graded before this measurement existed. Excluded from the average.
Respect checks whether the speaker argued with people’s positions and records rather than attacking the people: insults, mockery, or bad motives assigned to them. Criticism of what someone did, however strong, is not marked.
Clarity · 100
0 of 41 deductions are Clarity
Clarity checks for plain speaking, clear ownership of actions, and honest limits on certainty. A low score means vague promises or evasive language.
Nothing lost points.
Claims · 3
This list shows the factual statements you can check for yourself: the words as said, and the claim restated to stand on its own.
1 “Wealthy donors and corporate interests led by The Federalist Society spent billions of dollars” search 2 “This government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.” search 3 “The Roberts Court is the culmination of a decades-long crusade” search
