We fixed the keg said:Quote:
major in Law, Jurisprudence, and Social Thought.
AND…"in political thought and intellectual history"
A squad of social warriors for sure.
We fixed the keg said:Quote:
major in Law, Jurisprudence, and Social Thought.
Quote:
Social Thought: How law intersects with issues like race, gender, class, and cultural history.
JUST IN: A federal judge has rejected the Trump admin’s attempt to block a city ordinance in Boston that restricts cooperation with ICE. https://t.co/rulzkRH7Uz pic.twitter.com/bumKNsnVeK
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) May 28, 2026
nortex97 said:
DoJ probe launched finally into the contemptible E Jean Carroll:E. Jean Carroll, who herself claimed to be a massive Trump fan 15 years ago, appears deranged and sick. She lives with rodents, names her cat Vagina, and her dog Tits. She writes stories about what her dog taught her about sex, claimed on live TV that rape was sexy, and paints… https://t.co/umffwXQ3IW pic.twitter.com/QRmyAd3eBU
— Apple Lamps (@lamps_apple) May 28, 2026
Reminder her crusade was funded by Reid Hoffman, a close epstein associate no less, which she lied about in her deposition:Whoops!
— C3 (@C_3C_3) May 28, 2026
The moment it’s clear E Jean Carroll lied during her deposition in her scam against President Trump.
She just “totally forgot” Reid Hoffman was the one funding the operation.
They all need to pay. pic.twitter.com/M6NbeyRSQB
His Hopewell Fund is a dark money juggernaut that was managed by Arabella Advisors.
The following is a statement by Andrew S. Boutros, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois:
— U.S. Attorney’s Office (NDIL) (@NDILnews) May 28, 2026
“In light of wide-spread reporting and intense media and public interest into the E. Jean Carroll matter in New York, the Chicago U.S. Attorney’s Office can confirm…
Judge Cooper has rendered mixed decision on Kennedy Center, which I'm still reading. But he finds RENAMING was ILLEGAL, and decision to close it down for 2 years was dereliction of common law duty of prudence.https://t.co/CL9FtzQSNi pic.twitter.com/eSFFewF2wS
— Roger Parloff (@rparloff) May 29, 2026
Judge Cooper enjoins board's closure decision, but will allow some repairs, and won't categorically forbid closure if board makes same decision after considering all factors. pic.twitter.com/4RwrxZaG1Z
— Roger Parloff (@rparloff) May 29, 2026
Leonie Brinkema is the same judge who tossed out the case against Russiagate operative Stefan Halper. So naturally, she was randomly assigned to the case where Russiagate victims are now seeking redress. https://t.co/aDWeojxL7J
— Hans Mahncke (@HansMahncke) May 29, 2026
Immediately after the injunction -- and despite the recent en banc Fifth Circuit win -- the district court entered an order. And @KenPaxtonTX filed a stay pending appeal. A majority of judges on the Fifth had found no standing. Judge Oldham led 7 to hold the law OK on the merits. pic.twitter.com/ms12GJOmzR
— Eric W. (@EWess92) May 29, 2026
Iowa and many States are still defending their similar laws across the country.
— Eric W. (@EWess92) May 29, 2026
Read the stay order here: https://t.co/vgPXLLkAT0
Read the injunction entered with the spirit of Aloha, here: https://t.co/vgPXLLkAT0
BREAKING: D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals rules that Hegseth policy barring military service by transgender people is fueled by unconstitutional animus.
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) June 1, 2026
2-1 decision bars military from removing some currently-serving transgender service members.https://t.co/jWLzjEzHx9 pic.twitter.com/IrjNA64ObG
NEW: Hegseth's policy to exclude transgender service members from the military was rooted in a "bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group," a federal appeals court panel ruled Monday.
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) June 1, 2026
w/ @joshgerstein https://t.co/lttAAPwabo pic.twitter.com/nij629GWuJ
The Carroll case rested on a sequence of legal maneuvers with no precedent in American civil litigation. Democratic legislators passed a retroactive temporary law eliminating the statute of limitations for decades-old accusations that could not be dated, located, or defended with… https://t.co/uQc1kHsydU
— Apple Lamps (@lamps_apple) June 1, 2026
Quote:
The Carroll case rested on a sequence of legal maneuvers with no precedent in American civil litigation. Democratic legislators passed a retroactive temporary law eliminating the statute of limitations for decades-old accusations that could not be dated, located, or defended with alibis. The day the temporary law took effect, Carroll filed her pre-prepared lawsuit, the first in the state to do so.
A Democratic mega-donor secretly funded the plaintiff's legal costs through a nonprofit. The arrangement stayed hidden until one of Trump's lawyers discovered it. A Clinton-appointed judge then sealed all records so the jury never learned the billionaire backer had publicly committed to Trump's political destruction. Every participant in the legislative, funding, and judicial steps operated inside the same political network, and each decision produced the same cumulative result.
The jury explicitly checked "no" on the verdict form's specific rape question. The judge ruled rape proven anyway, claiming the jury had used a common rather than statutory definition… an impossibility, since their rejection under the common definition precludes rape by any standard. Trump's team was barred from arguing innocence before a second jury, which awarded $83.3 million ($65 million punitive) on the rape finding the first jury had rejected.
A defendant was sued for defamation over denying an accusation, prevented from asserting that denial as a defense, tried before a judge who concealed the plaintiff's political funding, and hit with a nine-figure verdict built on facts the jury itself refused to find.
No comparable sequence exists in recorded U.S. civil litigation history.
will25u said:Leonie Brinkema is the same judge who tossed out the case against Russiagate operative Stefan Halper. So naturally, she was randomly assigned to the case where Russiagate victims are now seeking redress. https://t.co/aDWeojxL7J
— Hans Mahncke (@HansMahncke) May 29, 2026
If federal judges can feel shame, the three-judge panel the Court reversed should be embarrassed. You can hate Callais, you can think it's wrongly decided, but if you're a lower court judge, you have to follow it. Anything else is a threat to the constitutional order.
— ProsecutorsPodcast (@ProsecutorsPod) June 3, 2026
And this… https://t.co/lxS0wigx4q
Quote:
Just over two weeks later, on May 26, the lower court which included one Clinton appointee and two Trump appointees again barred Alabama from using the 2023 map, directing it to use the map created by the special master instead. The court emphasized that "we cannot see our way clear to requiring Alabamians to cast their votes in the 2026 elections under a districting plan tainted by intentional race-based discrimination."
On May 27, Alabama came back to the Supreme Court, asking the justices to pause the lower court's ruling and allow it to use the 2023 map in the 2026 elections. Alabama Solicitor General A. Barrett Bowdre argued that the court's decision in "Callais vindicates Alabama's position on the lawfulness of the 2023 Plan, yet the district court decided in one week that Callais changed nothing." The district court, Bowdre stressed, did not require the challengers to offer alternative maps that would achieve Alabama's goals while still maintaining two majority-Black districts, as the Supreme Court suggested it should have, and "t did not matter to the district court that drawing an additional race-based district came at the cost of sacrificing communities of interest" specifically, predominantly white communities along the state's Gulf Coast "and pairing incumbents."
The challengers countered that it was too late for the Supreme Court to intervene. They pointed to testimony by a senior election official indicating that if the state wanted to implement the 2023 map, it would have to finish reassigning voters in its voter registration database by June 2. Indeed, they emphasized, "the evidence in the record shows that Alabama cannot administer" a special primary election in August, under a law passed by the state's legislature in May to account for the possibility that the Supreme Court's decision in Callais would allow Alabama to use its 2023 map, even if the Supreme Court had granted Alabama's request on June 1. Moreover, they added, the Supreme Court's decision in Callaisshould make no difference to the lower court's ruling in their case, because of the lower court's conclusion that Alabama violated the Constitution by intentionally discriminating against Black voters.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court stated that the district court "failed to follow our instruction in Callais that the mere fact that voters of different races vote for different parties is not relevant to proving racially polarized voting patterns." It further held that the district court's decision, not Alabama's request for relief, had come too late. "We have repeatedly cautioned that lower federal courts should not 'alter the election rules on the eve of an election,'" the court said. "Here, the District Court interposed itself into Alabama's ongoing efforts to conduct its imminent 2026 congressional elections under maps that its elected representatives selected. Its view that conducting the elections under court-imposed maps would be more convenient for the State was not a valid justification for that intervention."
In her 17-page dissent, Sotomayor asserted that Alabama "has no legitimate interest in enforcing an unconstitutional map, while vast harms will likely arise from upending the status quo, sowing chaos in Alabama, and rewarding Alabama's gamesmanship." "Because I choose to defend the rule of law and the right of all Alabamians to participate equally in democracy," Sotomayor concluded, "I respectfully dissent."
🚨 A Chicago federal judge has blocked a Florida state-court lawsuit against the American Academy of Pediatrics over its stance on gender-affirming care. pic.twitter.com/0qINA6ALLY
— SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) June 3, 2026
He also found that AAP is likely to show Florida's state-court lawsuit was brought in bad faith, allowing the federal court to intervene despite the Younger abstention doctrine, which generally bars federal courts from interfering with ongoing state enforcement actions.
— SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) June 3, 2026
Read the ruling here: https://t.co/qiPPGTcPPg
— SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) June 3, 2026
While more of a preemption case than a structural constitution case, this is an important win for Federalism. And the bipartisan panel includes Judge H.A. Thomas (Biden), Callahan (GWB) & Johnstone (Biden) .
— Eric W. (@EWess92) June 4, 2026
Read the opinion here: https://t.co/TIZDdSpClG
Judge declines to block Trump executive order on voter eligibility lists, mail-in voting limits https://t.co/og8Ewr01a7
— John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) June 4, 2026
🚨New: A federal judge from Rhode Island John J. McConnell Jr said the Trump administration must restart applications for asylum and other immigration processing pic.twitter.com/5qarLdwIew
— The Calvin Coolidge Project (@TheCalvinCooli1) June 5, 2026
Fascinating pushback from the top lawyer at @DHSgov. Mr. Percival is known to be an excellent attorney, and his distillation of the complex-seeming challenges to almost every one of President Trump and Secretary Mullin's policies is illuminating. https://t.co/e1jnb8Vuip
— Eric W. (@EWess92) June 5, 2026
Federal judge dramatically oversteps her authority. And she refers the DOJ lawyers for discipline?!
— Chad Mizelle (@chad_mizelle) June 6, 2026
I have a feeling Judge McElroy is about to get a mountain of judicial misconduct complaints. https://t.co/LTLtvYnFkr
JUST IN: Judge blocks Trump admin's gender and immigration related restrictions on USDA programs like SNAP and school lunch. Judge Myong Joun (Biden/MA) grants preliminary injunction in this multi-state suit: https://t.co/H5HA3cy4j8 Order: pic.twitter.com/9k7JshLL0D
— Josh Gerstein (@joshgerstein) June 5, 2026
*That was fast* Chief Judge Chagares gives the government immediate relief. No hearing on Monday. Both the Petitioner and the district judge have 14 days to respond to the mandamus petition 👀 https://t.co/VK0ZoBB2vp pic.twitter.com/QDLMBBUjgV
— Eric W. (@EWess92) June 7, 2026
Major legal victory by @DAGToddBlanche and the Trump Justice Department:
— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) June 7, 2026
The chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit halted the lawless judicial inquisition of DHS by Biden New Jersey Judge Zahid Nisar Quraishi, the first Muslim judge in America. pic.twitter.com/9B0VIxQYzr
You thought you hated liberal boomers? You don’t hate them nearly enough.
— Bad Hombre (@Badhombre) June 8, 2026
A 69-year-old retired bureaucrat from Alexandria, Virginia, Susan F. Douglas, is suing to stop the planned UFC Freedom 250 event at the White House as part of America’s 250th birthday celebration.
Her… pic.twitter.com/UMIpJ9aiiK
Quote:
You thought you hated liberal boomers? You don't hate them nearly enough.
A 69-year-old retired bureaucrat from Alexandria, Virginia, Susan F. Douglas, is suing to stop the planned UFC Freedom 250 event at the White House as part of America's 250th birthday celebration.
Her argument? The event would cause her "aesthetic injury," meaning she doesn't like looking at it. She also claims watching it would worsen the physical pain from her osteoarthritis.
A patriotic celebration featuring Americans enjoying themselves would allegedly cause Susan both emotional distress and physical pain. Think about that.
After spending more than 50 years working in DC, Susan shares that she now devotes her retirement to protesting the White House ballroom and construction of the triumphant arch, opposing renovations like those of reflection pool, and serving as a "safety marshal" at No Kings protests.
Susan is also a prolific donor to the James Talarico for Senate campaign, according to FEC records. Make of that what you will.
Liberal boomers spent decades running the country into the ground, shipping jobs overseas, and opening the floodgates to third worlders. Now that they're retired, they dedicate themselves to draining the joy out of life for all other Americans.
nortex97 said:Major legal victory by @DAGToddBlanche and the Trump Justice Department:
— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) June 7, 2026
The chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit halted the lawless judicial inquisition of DHS by Biden New Jersey Judge Zahid Nisar Quraishi, the first Muslim judge in America. pic.twitter.com/9B0VIxQYzr
JUST IN: A federal judge has ruled Trump's $100,000 H-1B visa fee is an unauthorized tax on businesses and must be vacated. https://t.co/bQXFTaiMmK pic.twitter.com/g5HTy9Cu0X
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) June 8, 2026
NEW: The judge cited two Supreme Court cases that supported blocking Trump's $100,000 H-1B fee: The 2012 Obamacare ruling labeling the individual mandate a tax; the 2026 tariff ruling saying the president can't levy taxes w/o clear approval from Congress.https://t.co/cjs52igVyf
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) June 8, 2026
The battle between judges of different districts takes a very odd turn as NDCA now joins the fray with an unorthodox order last night. Let’s break down how we got here and what’s happening now. https://t.co/2Dw3pSoGRF
— Abhi Kambli (@AbhiKambli1984) June 9, 2026
Judge McElroy then retaliated by referring DOJ attorneys for discipline (which is still playing out). A similar battle was playing out with a hospital in CA. Initially, this judge declined to grant immediate relief but apparently changed course with specious reasoning.
— Abhi Kambli (@AbhiKambli1984) June 9, 2026
Second, the court’s rationale is the All Writs Act. While the statute can be a catch all provision to preserve a court’s jurisdiction, it doesn’t independently grant jurisdiction. Basically, a court can’t use the statute to create jurisdiction where it doesn’t already exist.
— Abhi Kambli (@AbhiKambli1984) June 9, 2026
So what now? Judge O’Connor in TX did not back down before and there’s no reason to believe he’ll act differently here. CA1 also overrode the district court in RI and perhaps this goes to CA9. Also possible that Judge Pitts changes course (again). This will be closely watched.
— Abhi Kambli (@AbhiKambli1984) June 9, 2026
👀 A federal judge in Florida is excoriating the Trump administration for a "masterclass in litigation cynicism" by accepting immigration judge's ruling that conflicted with (and is legally superseded by) his own.
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) June 11, 2026
"Give me a break." Judge Dudek says.https://t.co/s0r4drRcrW pic.twitter.com/gUK08vP7Gf
Even if the district judge COULD force the immigration judge to give a hearing, he has no power over the result. The immigration judge could just reject the claim anyway.
— Tom Henderson (@tom__henderson) June 12, 2026
Congress didn't give district judges any role in immigration, and it's way past time they accept that.
BREAKING: In a landmark new legal opinion, DOJ has effectively repealed a race-based Obama-era expansion of "disparate impact" liability that ordered EEOC to punish employers who conduct criminal background checks of black job applicants by declaring the EEOC rule "unlawful and…
— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) June 12, 2026