There are some uhh oddities to the Trump campaign's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint, incl:
- the clean version, filed as an exhibit, is the *first* amended complaint
- they--the plaintiffs--went ahead and signed the proposed order on behalf of the judge
- the clean version, filed as an exhibit, is the *first* amended complaint
- they--the plaintiffs--went ahead and signed the proposed order on behalf of the judge
https://twitter.com/adambonin/status/1328364894618574852
Also no attorney signatures appear on the redline (comparing first and second). That's no big deal in itself, but since the plaintiffs didn't file a clean version of the second amended complaint, there's no indication which attorneys if any have signed the new complaint.
This is their second try at filing these documents tonight, btw.
Effecting a federal judge's electronic signature on your proposed order at any time, and especially before he has ruled on your motion, is something I'd recommend against--tends to undermine rapport. courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
The Trump campaign’s legal adviser says that affixing the federal judge’s signature to the proposed order was not an error, but in fact a courtesy to the court. In other orders on the docket, the judge does not use a seal.
https://twitter.com/jennaellisesq/status/1329242847585906690?s=21
https://twitter.com/jennaellisesq/status/1329242847585906690
The revised filing also now has a clean copy of the proposed second amended complaint attached, fixing the other oddity I pointed out. It's signed by Giuliani, Scaringi, and Caffrey. courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
