Wanted to do a quick thread today on SCOTUS and Kavanaugh. Was planning on doing it yesterday given that I've seen a tremendous amount of gaslighting and bots pushing the narrative that our Courts are overwhemingly corrupt and bought and paid for. An article posted on 1/
.@20committee 's private channel @thespybrief re: Kavanaugh's confirmation process, actually an op-ed, reminded me to do this thread regardless of my insane schedule. What I see are these bots and bad actors attempting to cordin us off into two camps, the MSM is more than 2/
happy to oblige, that our judicial system is being perverted by a right wing insurrection bent on destroying our liberal democracy and rendering us into a Handmaid's Tale type of dystopian nightmare. This take is nonsense. I have seen nothing of the sort occuring. My role 3/
as a civil rights attorney with a healthy federal practice is to keep my eyes on Court decisions, especially SCOTUS. By way of example, the Supreme Court rendered a decision this past term which significantly helped criminal defendants who were victims of manufactored 4/
or fabricated evidence by law enforcement personnel in order to convince a Grand Jury to indict. The case of McDonough v. Smith, et al involved the issue of when the statute of limitations begins to run on such claims. The 2nd Circuit ruled that it tolled or begins to run 5/
at the time the fabrication is made by the state actor or law enforcement personnel. This made it much more difficult for plaintiffs, former criminal defendants, to pursue recourse against the individual(s) responsible for the fabrication. By the time the criminal prosecution 6/
completed the time to sue or statute of limitations may have run. Further, if a criminal defendant were to institute an action for fabricating evidence, or denial of right to a fair trial, it may interfere or have a negative effect on his/her ability to defend themselves 7/
It also may act to waive their 5th amendment right to remain silent. The McDonough case, @neal_katyal did a great job orally arguing the matter, involved the fabrication of evidence by Smith claiming that McDonough forged absentee ballots in an election. There was no evidence 8/
this occurred. Smith then fabricated evidence, lied to the Grand Jury who indiceted Smith, then lied to the trial court jury that McDonough forged these documents. The trial ended in a mistrial. The prosecution pursued a second trial which ended in an aquittal for McDonough. 9/
Thereafter, McDonough institued an action under 42 USC 1983 encompassing a claim for fabricated evidence. The District Court held that the statute began to run at the time of the fabrication, the 2nd Circuit upheld this decision, SCOTUS reversed the 2nd Circuit and remanded 10/
the matter back to the trial Court. SCOTUS held that the statute for a fabricated evidence claim begins to run at the cessation of the criminal proceedings terminated in his favor at the end of his second trial placing the 2nd Circuit in line with the rest of the circuits. 11/
This is a great decision. It affords the victim of police misconduct involving the fabrication of evidence to institute his lawsuit after final dismissal of all criminal proceedings. The statute of limitations for such suits mirrors the state statute for torts it is /12
brought in. In NYS, that is 3 years. I regularly litigate these types of cases and am thrilled with this decision. Writing the majority opinion for the Court was Justice Sotomayer. Joining her in this decision were Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, CJ Roberts, Alito, & Kavanaugh /13
Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kagan joined in the dissent. Before you say "Well, this was just one case...." There are many cases in which the majority, even with a center right bench, issue great decisions such as this. My point is, we need to read each decision and try /14
to ascertain it's import. If you don't understand something, seek out other legal minds here like @DirkSchwenk @AshaRangappa_ @Mimirocah1 @neal_katyal @tribelaw and many others. Analyze things for yourself, make your own judgments, & reach out to credible sources for imput. /15
@DirkSchwenk @AshaRangappa_ @Mimirocah1 @neal_katyal @tribelaw Don't simply rely upon the MSM or any particular talking head to make that opinion for you. 16X
Add. Can’t forget to follow @File411 either.
Here’s a link to the case via @SCOTUSblog scotusblog.com/case-files/cas…
