Undeterred, in yesterday's In re Grand Jury case Rao adopts an argument that DOJ itself didn't raise & that DOJ concedes ... [2]
Iconoclasm isn't *necessarily* a bad thing, even in a judge. Even so, such an aggressively idiosyncratic way ... [6]
Well, in McGahn, just as in Mazars, the subpoena was directed at a private party-- [10]
Likewise, Judge Griffith writes that "Unlike McGahn, this case does not involve a suit between the political branches over executive-branch documents or testimony. . . . [11]
But the McGahn case, likewise, is not "a suit between the political branches," nor does it involve "executive branch documents or testimony." Don McGahn is a *private citizen.* [12]