Oh wait, the Court grants the motions to dismiss on the record. This case is dead too.
The Judge had clearly already written his remarks before this argument and was just letting Powell talk.
What a stupid and shameful litigation this is.
The Judge is delivering a wide-ranging dismissal. No standing, laches, the whole gamut.
"No question in my mind if I denied the motion to dismiss I would be reversed."
"There is no question that I could not grant the relief the plaintiffs ask for anyway."
"I find decertification does not exist."
"Plaintiffs want this Court to substitute its judgment for the votes 2.5 million Georgian voters. This I will not do."
"The motions to dismiss are granted. The TRO I entered is dissolved. Court is adjourned."
Yet again, a judge delivers a complete dissection of these awful and anti-democratic lawsuits. Will they stop now? Nope, because we're dealing with grifters. But there is no chance of success for Trump.
To answer various questions, I think sanctions should be imposed against Powell et. al., for filing obviously frivolous litigation, but they won't be (as a matter of realism). I will be pleasantly surprised if they are in any case that I've seen so far.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here's the deal. There are in fact cases - cases where the Supreme Court law is against you - where your only job is to lose in the lower courts as fast as possible. That's because you can only win on the facts if you get *new law* made. And only SCOTUS can reverse itself. But!
Powell's various cases and Trump's cases are not like that. Their problem is not really some SCOTUS law they're trying to change. Their problem is that their claims fail in every way: the facts are made up, the law is against them on every ground, they're litigated badly /2
There's no "circuit split" in these cases, for example - that is, Trump isn't challenging some law where the lower courts have disagreed, or where people have been agitating to reverse SCOTUS precedent for years. There's literally not a single indicator of a SCOTUS case. /3
Early in my career I billed a lot. A lot, a lot. I don’t even want to put the number here. A lot.
I couldn’t do it. It made me sick. If billing like that makes *you* sick, stop doing it. It doesn’t make you a lesser lawyer, or weak, or show you’ve failed.
I know, this is my long running hobby horse. But it’s true. If your body and brain tell you to stop, you gotta stop. Just right away. Don’t let your ego make you continue.
I know of what I speak. I’m talking to you, striver person. You!
It took a lot for me to get over the fact that Dude/ette X, who I thought I was as good as, loved the grind and enjoyed it, and I didn't. But just get over it. You'll be way happier.
I want to tell my best Judge Reavley story, that I think I've told before. Each Fifth Circuit law clerk gets a turn at robing the judges before argument. They mostly robe themselves, so this amounts to making sure they have their materials, but also.. "knocking them in" 1/
You knock on the big brass ring in the robing room to alert the courtroom that the judges are coming. I had heard through the grapevine that Judge Reavley liked a very loud knock. He thought it was important. And that he'd be disappointed if I only managed a wimpy one. 2/
So I hauled off and legit threw the ring at the door with all my force. The knock resounded in the courtroom - my fellow law clerks told me some people jumped. But it was *also* really loud in the robing room. /3
As I suggested it might be, this is a cold, clinical dismantling of the Trump campaign's claims and absurd legal strategy. Haven't yet finished the whole opinion, but it's a biting read.
An #AppellateTwitter side-note, Judge Bibas is a magnificent writer. Just wonderful. He uses all of those gifts here - so clear, so crisp.