The most wonderful time of the year...

[Joes Place]

To the contrary Joe, I've not "missed" any point. I was quite explicit that I've not focused on all of the nitty gritty of 1/6 in the way that some obsessives have

The "nitty gritty" or "details" are the entire point.

Both of these points are factual:

1. POTUS holds no role, whatsoever, in the election process, and therefore, there is simply nothing for SCOTUS to review in his immunity claim, because he cannot have been engaging in any "official act", per Constitutional definitions
2. Trump has not been charged with any crime related to any "official act", and therefore, there actually is nothing to be appealed here.

 

[Finance85]

The "nitty gritty" or "details" are the entire point.

Both of these points are factual:

1. POTUS holds no role, whatsoever, in the election process, and therefore, there is simply nothing for SCOTUS to review in his immunity claim, because he cannot have been engaging in any "official act", per Constitutional definitions
2. Trump has not been charged with any crime related to any "official act", and therefore, there actually is nothing to be appealed here.

It's not just about what Trump has been charged with; it's also about the defense Trump has raised, which is novel, but has to be addressed. The courts have to address that defense. It's easy to understand why you don't see that. You only see what you want to see on any issue, and you will never pause to see another perspective.

You should take a class on litigation. It would help you to understand that a good lawyer is expected to see more than one side to an argument. In fact the reason why we have appellate courts is because good lawyers can disagree.

Now I happen to believe a POTUS can be charged with a crime, while in office, or while out of office. I believe impeachment is about removal from office, and is not a substitute for being prosecuted for a crime.

 

[St. Louis Hawk]

Probably not. Seems like Alito was out a couple of days last week.

Barron's magazine has said the term would be extended into July.

Court says opinions M and F next week.

I’m guessing after they drop the F opinions, it will look something like this:

 

[Aardvark86]

Court says opinions M and F next week.

I’m guessing after they drop the F opinions, it will look something like this:

View embedded media

Interesting. Saw m but not f.

 

[St. Louis Hawk]

Interesting. Saw m but not f.

Saw it in a tweet. Haven’t seen it confirmed w another source yet. I think it was 360 or Bloomberg.

 

[Aardvark86]

Saw it in a tweet. Haven’t seen it confirmed w another source yet. I think it was 360 or Bloomberg.

the court's website says this friday (tomorrow) and monday 7.1. have a hard time believing they'd go to 7/5.

 

[St. Louis Hawk]

the court's website says this friday (tomorrow) and monday 7.1. have a hard time believing they'd go to 7/5.

That makes sense. I probably misread which Friday.

 

[Aardvark86]

That makes sense. I probably misread which Friday.

I hereby relinquish the keys to the car for tomorrow to you, my friend.

 

[St. Louis Hawk]

I hereby relinquish the keys to the car for tomorrow to you, my friend.

I’ll be your guest announcer, Fred Friendly, with tomorrows version of the Constitution: That Delicate Balance.

 

[Whiskeydeltadeltatango]

I hope the new guy post tits.

 

[Aardvark86]

I’ll be your guest announcer, Fred Friendly, with tomorrows version of the Constitution: That Delicate Balance.

For the uninitiated:

The Constitution: That Delicate Balance - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I always preferred Irving Younger trial advocacy lectures because he used profanity. Also, not sure if it was one of the Friendly series, but I will always remember when Arthur Miller asked C. Everett Koop whether he'd give money to a bum on the street, knowing the bum would just use it to buy drugs or booze, to which Koop responded, "yes, I would, because at that moment, it'll probably do him more good than anything else I could do for him."

 

[Finance85]

For the uninitiated:

The Constitution: That Delicate Balance - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I always preferred Irving Younger trial advocacy lectures because he used profanity. Also, not sure if it was one of the Friendly series, but I will always remember when Arthur Miller asked C. Everett Koop whether he'd give money to a bum on the street, knowing the bum would just use it to buy drugs or booze, to which Koop responded, "yes, I would, because at that moment, it'll probably do him more good than anything else I could do for him."

Potter Stewart, author of the most famous SCOTUS quote ever.

 

[Aardvark86]

Potter Stewart, author of the most famous SCOTUS quote ever.

Our (or at least my) generation got the Fred Friendly seminars. Today's kids get tweets from Chis and Rico.

 

[seminole97]

Murthy - no standing to challenge social media content moderation bullying by Wh, by Barrett (6-3). Never going to be disappointed when phony plaintiff AG's get bounced on standing.

If they get one of the people targeted by the WH, can they sue?


Doughty quoted communications from administration officials to social media company employees, saying they represent "examples of coercion exercised by the White House defendants." Here's a small sampling:

• "Cannot stress the degree to which this needs to be resolved immediately. Please remove this account immediately.”
• To Facebook: “Are you guys ****ing serious? I want an answer on what happened here and I want it today.”
• “This is a concern that is shared at the highest (and I mean highest) levels of the WH”
• “Hey folks, wanted to flag the below tweet and am wondering if we can get moving on the process of having it removed. ASAP”

 

[Aardvark86]

If they get one of the people targeted by the WH, can they sue?


Doughty quoted communications from administration officials to social media company employees, saying they represent "examples of coercion exercised by the White House defendants." Here's a small sampling:

• "Cannot stress the degree to which this needs to be resolved immediately. Please remove this account immediately.”
• To Facebook: “Are you guys ****ing serious? I want an answer on what happened here and I want it today.”
• “This is a concern that is shared at the highest (and I mean highest) levels of the WH”
• “Hey folks, wanted to flag the below tweet and am wondering if we can get moving on the process of having it removed. ASAP”

Highly unlikely. One of the plaintiffs was an individual whose posts were allegedly restricted. As I think I noted somewhere, the court ruled that even the 'bullying acts' were insufficient to show standing-related causation because the social media companies had otherwise/previously imposed content moderation. Thus, the bullying was merely an 'overlay' on top of that and not enough of an 'independent' cause for standing purposes.

Beyond that, these are not actually enough, IMO, to show coercion. These are just mean demands spoken by wh staff assholes in the way that WH staff assholes normally speak to people, and so frankly, I was underwhelmed by Alito's reference to these things. On the other hand, the part where they start rattling the saber of repealing 230 CDA immunity for socials is a little more interesting, but I'd imagine if pressed, they'd say that is speculative puffery given the difficulty of enacting legislation.

 

[St. Louis Hawk]

First two opinions -

Loper - Chevron overruled. No shock if you followed the oral arguments.

City of Grants Pass - Homelessness / camping / sleeping in public can be criminalized.

 

[Finance85]

No surprise at all on Loper.

City of Grants Pass is interesting. I listened to the oral arguments on that one. The vote was predictable. I enjoy Gorsuch opinions and find it interesting he wrote this one.

Fischer is one the left will hate. It's likely a bellweather for Trump (1/6). The vote is curious, with Barrett and Jackson flipping sides.

 

[Aardvark86]

Stl you disappoint me. Finance, you’re in.

 

[St. Louis Hawk]

Stl you disappoint me. Finance, you’re in.

Poor effort on my part. Was in a depo.

 

[lucas80]

Where’s Alito?
Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[lucas80]

Health care professionals? Sure.
Parents? Maybe, as long as they don't harm their children in the process.
Patients? Minors shouldn't be making medical decisions for themselves.

Got it. You know more than doctors who specialize in gender care, and have more concern for kids than their very own parents.

 

[St. Louis Hawk]

@Aardvark86

 

[Aardvark86]

Where’s Alito?
Inquiring minds want to know.

Careful my friend. He’s only written 4 and one outstanding is trump immunity

 

[Aardvark86]

View embedded media

@Aardvark86

Bizarro

 

[Finance85]

Got it. You know more than doctors who specialize in gender care, and have more concern for kids than their very own parents.

Please re-read my post, which you quoted.