Profile picture
, 3 tweets, 1 min read
My Authors
Read all threads
Something I’ve never understood about the “impeachment requires crime” argument:

The “Madisonian Compromise” at the const’l convention left unresolved whether there would be _any_ lower federal courts. Without those, there couldn’t be federal crimes—so no impeachable offenses??
And if the argument is that the Constitution’s reference to “high crimes and misdemeanors” is a reference to _state_ criminal laws, why would—or should—state criminal laws ever speak to abuses of federal offices?
Here’s Michael Collins and Jonathan Nash in the @VirginiaLawRev in 2011 on why federal crimes generally can’t (and couldn’t be) prosecuted in state court:

virginialawreview.org/volumes/conten…
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Enjoying this thread?

Keep Current with Steve Vladeck

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @steve_vladeck see all

Profile picture
Steve Vladeck
@steve_vladeck
The Solicitor General has responded to this #SCOTUS order, which follows up on statements he made at oral argument on Jan. 15:

supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/1…

The long and short of it is ... not good. The SG _did_ misstate the law, but doesn't acknowledge—or apologize for—doing so:
The dispute is over the availability of other remedies _besides_ the ADEA for the kind of claim advanced by the Petitioner in Babb.

Here is the Solicitor General at the oral argument in response to a question from Justice Kavanaugh:

supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments…
In his rebuttal, @lathamwatkins partner Roman Martinez accused the Solicitor General of misrepresenting the law on this point.

This exchange is almost certainly what prompted the Justices to issue the unusual order requesting supplemental briefing on exactly this question...
Read 6 tweets
Profile picture
Steve Vladeck
@steve_vladeck
Whatever you think of @realDonaldTrump, this notion—that he’s just doing what prior Presidents have done when it comes to using foreign policy for his personal benefit—is not just wrong, but it will only encourage future Presidents to stoop to his level:

nytimes.com/2020/01/23/opi…
Do Presidents often pursue policy goals because they may also have electoral benefits? Sure. That’s beyond dispute.

But are there _any_ prior examples of a President actively strong-arming a foreign power for no reason other than to dig up dirt on his political opponents? No.
Blurring this distinction is not just disingenuous, but it would set a terrible precedent going forward—the very concern that @JoshMBlackman’s op-ed is purportedly responding to.
Read 3 tweets
Profile picture
Steve Vladeck
@steve_vladeck
To me, the most important takeaway from today's Fifth Circuit #ACA ruling is that #SCOTUS is off the hook, at least for now.

Yes, the court struck down the "individual mandate." But the real question (whether the rest of the ACA must fall) got kicked back to the district court.
It's entirely possible that we're right back in this same place a year from now, if the district court reaffirms its ... controversial ... severability analysis and this same panel affirms. But this issue could look very different to #SCOTUS in early 2021 than it would look now.
And so long as the rest of the ACA isn't going anywhere in the interim (which, for now, it isn't), there's just no imperative for the Justices to step in now. So even though California (et al.) may ask #SCOTUS to take the case, I'd be shocked if the Court agreed—at least for now.
Read 3 tweets

Related threads

Profile picture
WeAreFairCop
@WeAreFairCop
It's 10.20am.

We are in court.

The public seats are nearly full.

Hopefully let the tweeting commence #FairCopJR
And we are off! Checking the state of the bundles and shuffling up to let more people sit. Now a very full house. #FairCopJR
Judge - this is a very important case... I am not concerned with a hotly contested debate; that is for Parliament...We will refer to biological sex in full knowledge of the controversy and not wishing to demean... #FairCopJR
Read 221 tweets
Profile picture
Josh Russell
@josh_emerson
I was looking around at the #Impeachment hashtag this morning and found a set of "russian" twitter #bots.
This guys tweet engagement (350+ retweets) is all bots.
They seem like spam bots but they are doing some interesting stuff so I figure I would post about them.
Here is what tipped me off to the bots. All the accounts are very similar.
I only say russian because the accounts use Cyrillic in their names and tweets.
They could be ran by anyone from anywhere, I really don't know.
Read 9 tweets
Profile picture
Puesto Loco™
@PuestoLoco
1974 #Impeachment manual –
“83 articles of impeachment had been voted out of the House up to that point against a dozen federal judges, one senator & Andrew Johnson. FEWER THAN A THIRD actually involved specific criminal acts...
...Far more common, they wrote, was that the House was dealing with allegations that someone had violated their duties, oath of office or seriously undermined public confidence in their ability to perform their official functions.”
politico.com/magazine/story…
#Impeachment Manual, 1974 “Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment”
PDF File → ia801902.us.archive.org/14/items/const…
Read 5 tweets
Profile picture
Priscilla ⭐️⭐️⭐️
@Rasoio_di_Occam
Thread: 9/5/19
Op-Ed by United States Attorney General, William P. Barr

“End Nationwide Injunctions”

“The Dreamers case shows how willful courts can ruin the chance for political compromise.”

wsj.com/articles/end-n…
“When a federal court issues an order against enforcement of a government policy, the ruling traditionally applies only to the plaintiff in that case. Over the past several decades, however, some lower court federal judges have increasingly resorted to a procedural device...”
“...the ‘nationwide injunction’-to prevent the government from enforcing a policy against anyone in the country. Shrewd lawyers have learned to “shop” for a sympathetic judge willing to issue such an injunction.”
Read 32 tweets
Profile picture
Joseph Stalin
@StalinIsBack
1/8 My favorite #quote by #JosephStalin, which explains the scientific, #DialecticalMaterialist explanation of true freedom in material reality, not just as an abstract ideal. #StalinIsBack #StalinLives #JVStalin #Stalin #StalinQuote #StalinQuotes #Truth #MELS #MarxismLeninism
2/8 Having an #objective, #rational, #ScientificSocialist, #Dialectical, & #Materialist viewpoint allows us to accurately see & evaluate & analyze #Truth & #Reality as they truly materially exist in this universe.
3/8 An idealistic, dogmatic viewpoint, which capitalists have, however, makes one irrational enough to 'see' freedom where freedom stays trapped on a piece of paper while people are oppressed in their actual lived lives.
Read 586 tweets

Trending hashtags

#Bush #MilitaryIndustrialComplex #CaptainSullenberger #martyrs #austerity #Lenin #FakeNewsMedia #Turkish #EternalRedSalute #Impeachment #morality #impeachmentSCAM #Crimea #DevonNunes #slaves #PBSFakeNews #NeverGamble #PR #Pensionsversicherungen #WorkingClass #FoxFakeNews #bigoted #realdog_6667583 #Republicans #SudaneseUprising
Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!