Thread by @MikeSacksEsq

Hearing is still going on, but I have to go on air now. So go to @KlasfeldReports for more updates

Just deleted a tweet saying Judge Grimberg said the case was a closer call than the Dem Party argued and wanted to decide on the briefs. Judge was talking about Dems’ motion to intervene, not about merits of case or plaintiffs’ standing.

SORRY FOR THE HEART ATTACKS.

NOTE TO SELF: Don't livetweet reports from high-profile hearings I'm half-listening to while writing my on-air intro.

Judge taking a 10 minute recess, but he's dropping lots of hints he's not on board with the plantiffs here.

JUDGE: Plaintiffs motion for a temporary restraining order is denied.

Judge Grimberg, a Trump appointee, says pro-Trump plaintiff lacks standing to ask the court to block GA's certification of the state's count for Biden.

JUDGE: "Neither the Republican Party nor the Trump Campaign nor any other candidate has joined this lawsuit. That certainly would have changed the analysis when it comes to standing."

Judge on pro-Trump plaintiff's attempt to block signature match settlement agreement: "I didn't hear any justification for why the plaintiff delayed bringing this claim until 2 weeks after the election and on the cusp of this election being certified."

Judge Grimberg: "It seems to me the plaintiff fails to state a claim" to survive a motion to dismiss.

Judge: "There is no constitutional right in monitoring an election. It's not a life, it's not a liberty, and it's not a property. And for that reason, the procedural due process claim fails."

Judge: "Garden variety election disputes, including disputes surrounding the counting and marking of ballots does not rise to the level of a constitutional deprivation."

Judge: "There is no evidence that this [plaintiff] will suffer any harm or irreparable harm by denying this motion."

Judge: "The relief that the plaintiff is seeking here is quite striking...it would require halting the certification of results in a state election in which millions of people have voted, it would interfere with an election after the voting was done..."

Judge: "It harms the public interest in countless ways, particularly in the environment in which this election occurred....To halt the certification at literally the 11th hour would breed confusion and potentially disenfranchisement that I find has no basis in fact or in law."

And with that, hearing's over and case is dismissed.

If they want to appeal this to the 11th Circuit, they’ll have to move fast because GA’s certification is tomorrow

...which means perhaps we could get our first hint of what all 9 SCOTUS justices think of these post-election cases before tomorrow is over, too.

Or the plaintiffs here could just give up and let the Trump Campaign file its own suit in GA tomorrow as Rudy promised today.

I’m probably late to this but here’s Judge Grimberg’s written order throwing the Georgia case out courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…