Thread by @ZoeTillman

Hello. It's me, your friendly DC Circuit reporter, here to say that now that Trump has appealed his subpoena fight with House Dems to the DC Circuit (see: buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetil…), there is *no* *way* to know right now if Chief Judge Merrick Garland will hear the case 1/x

When cases go up on appeal, they're randomly assigned to a three-judge panel. Garland is one of 17 judges — 11 active, 6 senior — who are on the wheel, although senior judges take fewer cases, and some judges may have conflicts that require recusal, which can adjust the odds 2/x

So Garland could be on the panel. Or not. The chief judge doesn't get special sway over the random assignment process.

If whoever loses before the panel petitions the full (en banc) court to reconsider, *then* there's a more reliable chance Garland would be involved 3/x

When a party asks the en banc court to reconsider, all of the active judges (and senior judges who sat on the three-judge panel) participate, unless they're recused. That would include Garland. The losing side could also try to go right to SCOTUS and skip the en banc step 4/x

It's misleading to say, or strongly imply, right now that the Trump subpoena fight will go to Garland. It could! But we literally have no idea. And even if he is on the panel, he'd be one out of three judges, or one member of an en banc panel. He would not rule alone 5/x

You could say "XYZ case is going to Garland's court" any time a case is appealed from the district court in DC, or from an agency decision (those go directly to the DC Circuit). But it's a statement without meaning, because we don't know what panel the wheel will turn out 6/x

For those of you asking about whether Garland would recuse: We don't know. Absent an obvious financial conflict, he'd have to believe there was enough of an appearance of bias/actual bias issue to be a problem. And that's a really, really high bar to clear 7/x

Getting more into the weeds, framing Garland v. Trump as a dramatic revenge scenario isn't quite right either. Garland is one of the more moderate judges on that court, both in terms of jurisprudence and temperament. He's not out there throwing flames (which some judges do) 8/x

Here's something we do know: If Trump files an emergency motion to delay yesterday's order, it would go to a monthly motions panel. Right now that's Judges Tatel, Millett, and Rao. So no Garland there. That's different from whatever merits panel is later assigned 9/x

Finally on the Trump subpoena fight going to the DC Circuit (for now, I'm sure I've forgotten something): If you call it the DC Court of Appeals, we're no longer friends (that's a totally different court, don't do it!) 10/10