2/ So @CNN thought biggest take-away was that Russia is still meddling "as we sit here." That CNN thought that was the biggest take-away tells me that they haven't been listening to a word from the right. AG Barr testified that months ago, see my @FDRLSTedition.cnn.com/2019/07/24/pol…
3/3 No, the biggest take-away was that Mueller didn't know who Fusion GPS was and that that aspect was beyond his "purview." Sequestering myself now to work on more complete thoughts. END
THREAD on broad thoughts from hearing: My "gut" is that SCOTUS will follow what I call the Kavanaugh approach to nationwide injunctions and hold that there are rules & those must be followed and those rules require class certification to provide relief beyond Plaintiffs. 1/
2/ Justice Kavanaugh (echoed by several other justices) stressed that exigent circumstances purportedly justifying nationwide injunctions don't exist because courts can grant TRO/Preliminary Injunctions for putative classes (meaning class action lawsuits not yet certified).
3/ Given that reality, Justice Kavanaugh suggested the argument that we need nationwide injunctions collapses. And as he stressed couple times, there is a rule & those rules must be followed. If you listened to the argument, Justice Kavanaugh's approach came off balanced & sane.
🧵on SCOTUS Nationwide Injunction re birthright citizenship case. Couple preliminary points: The argument is NOT about the merits of the birthright citizenship case. You may hear reference to the APA or the Administrative Procedure Act. This case does NOT concern APA. 1/
2/ Justices may reference APA b/c whether nationwide injunctions are appropriate under APA is a different issue (again not before the court). You'll also hear discussion of "organizational standing". Standing means ability to "stand" before court & ask for remedy b/c YOU are hurt
3/ Organizations have "standing" to sue if at least one member has standing to sue. But to have a remedy, Trump Administration maintains CASA, the organizational plaintiff, must establish which members are actually injured (by affidavit) & injunction is limited to them.
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Trump Administration pounds SCOTUS in new filing asking court to lift administrative injunction entered for non-parties in the Alien Enemies Act case. h/t @gvincentamore 1/
3/ You'll recall this is case where SCOTUS entered a midnight injunction barring Trump from removing any members of a "putative class" of tDa members. "Putative class" means there was NEVER a class action lawsuit "certified"--it was a wanna-be class action.
🚨🚨🚨HUGE development in Alien Enemies Act case that SCOTUS entered a stay for an entire class that had not been certified. District judge now denies class certification. 1/
3/ This decision is first case where court denied class certification. Additionally, now that the court has denied class certification, it changes status quo of case before SCOTUS.
🚨New filing in Boasberg Alien Enemies Act case. Amazing this must be said! 1/
2/ That excerpt was from a Declaration filed by Trump Administration in support of its Response in Opposition to New Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. This Response is interesting as it is first effort by Trump Administration to explain whether it is in constructive control