NEW: #Arizona AG Kris Mayes just announced five of the #Trump officials charged in the Arizona fake electors scheme whose name were redacted in the original indictment:
• John Eastman
• Boris Epshteyn
• Christina Bobb
• Jenna Ellis
• Mike Roman #legal#WompWomp
Honestly, the Supreme Court justices today sounded even more deranged and clueless than I even expected. They are just too worried about hypothetical future presidents to focus on the fact that we have a former president indicted for attempting to overthrow an election who is now running for reelection on an explicitly authoritarian, anti-democracy platform. 1/ #LawFedi
Meta blocked a story critical of its climate change ad policies on all of its platform. An independent journalist asked permission to repost the story verbatim on her substack. It was blocked too.
so are hosting companies gonna do this? will they get away with claiming they own the #copyright to your websites; to sell your content to 3rd parties (aka AI dipshits)?
#Lawfedi: are there any folks here who deal with website owners/publishers "on the cloud"?
are there any kind of legal agreements or provisions, like a "Terms of User/Consumer", that y'all draft for your clients to make sure web hosting providers understand what they can and cannot do with your clients' websites?
The State Bar Court of California recommends that John Eastman be disbarred. The opinion is impressive - detailed, clear, and absolutely firm that lying about law and fact to a court is disqualifying for membership in the bar. Equally firmly, the court finds that Eastman conspired to commit a crime with his client, Donald Trump, by conspiring to obstruct the electoral count for the 2020 presidential election. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24521262-eastman-decision-trial#LawFedi#LegalEthics#Jan6 1/
US District Judge #AileenCannon’s ultimatum Mon night came as a surprise twist in what could have been a simple order; one merely asking federal prosecutors & Trump’s lawyers for proposed #JuryInstructions at the upcoming #trial.
“Under the statutory scheme established by the Presidential Records Act, the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President during the President’s term, and in the President’s sole discretion.”
Judge Amy Berman Jackson, Judicial Watch v. National Archives, 2012
"Come November, we will have an insurrectionist running for the highest office in the land because we have a Supreme Court that is unfit for purpose. Trump, it seems, isn’t the only danger to our democracy." - 🔥 @mehdihasan on how #SCOTUS's CO decision is not about the law. #LawFedi
Despite the unanimity of the justices, I disagree with the Supreme Court’s judgment that states may not enforce section 3 of the 14th A. That judgment is the bottom line. But far more dangerous is the majority opinion, which includes discussion that goes beyond this bottom line. Five justices have tried to prospectively prescribe two requirements irrelevant to the Colorado case. First, they claim that only Congress, not the judiciary or executive branch may enforce section 3. 1/ #LawFedi
So, the majority opinion in #trumpVanderson, adopted by five justices (Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh), insists that
a) section 3 requires implementing legislation, which means
b) only one branch of the federal government, Congress, may enforce section 3, and
c) these five justices prescribe a wholly novel, extra-textual, and entirely unprecedented set of requirements for any disqualification legislation Congress might pass. 4/ #LawFedi
You don't need to be a scientist or public health expert to know that this is absolutely bonkers.
Children with measles, an incredibly infectious disease, should not be going to school or wandering around making those who cannot vaccinate sick. They can permanently disable someone.
The shootings in Missouri today are another clarion call: every state in the U.S. can and should enact statutes to ground civil suits against irresponsible #gun manufacturers and sellers. The gun industry is fighting these statutes in court. I explain and defend the desirability, lawfulness, and constitutionality of such statutes in this article, forthcoming in Yale Law Journal Forum. Neither #PLCAA nor the #SecondAmendment invalidate these laws. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Dw3rMKXX1DlHKa9GXk1bojxSgYUxsP8r/view?usp=drivesdk#LawFedi#KansasCity
CO Lawyer: Imagining the failure to count electoral votes due to disqualification. A constitutional crisis in the making. It is why we need to have certainty before we go to the polls.
Justice Kagan: We've put limits on states as to who can be taken off a ballot, such as minor party candidates. It affects other state's rights and extraterritorial impacts. Why does it not apply here?
CO Lawyer: The issue in that case was a first amendment issue. Article II power is constrained by the first amendment, so those deadlines were too soon under 1st amendment. That isn't present here.
Kagan: There is a broader principle though. That there are certain national questions where states are not the repository of authority. I took Anderson's reasoning to say that, as in what right does a single state have?
CO Lawyer: CO is determining the right to determine the choice of their electors. Other states may allow insurrectionists on the ballot. CO does not.
Justice Gorsuch: Lets talk about "officers"! All officers are to be commissioned by the president. Is that language not all encompassing? President pro-tempore are offices, but not officers due to the incompatibility clause.
(He's talking grammar and syntax now! Textualist alert!)
Justice Kavanaugh: Dissenting opinion in this case said there were due process concerns in the process here, let alone the conclusion. Is there a concern about that in light of state power here?
CO Lawyer: That language was simply not correct. There was a five-day trial, option to call witnesses, cross examine, testify, etc. It was expedited because its a ballot-access case. There is a deadline.
Kavanaugh: Do you think: if not states, then who? Would that answer not be Congress? There is a federal statute for insurrection, what dod we make of that?
CO Lawyer: That was enacted years before Section 3, so it is not implementing legislation for section 3.
Kavanaugh: If the concern you have is that insurrectionists should not have federal office, we have a tool, insurrectionist prosecution and the conviction's bar from federal office.
CO Lawyer: Framers of section 3 clearly recognized criminal prosecution wasn't sufficient because they often go unpunished, and so created civil provision in Section 3.