Really weird — if not in a negotiating posture — to be fighting publicly to stay in charge of an organization whose board co-chairs are asking you to leave.
And, there we go: @HRC fired Alphonso David tonight, after a series of accusatory and aggressive statements from David, former Andrew Cuomo counsel, over the holiday weekend.
And for those who don’t know, the color of that screengrab text suggests this was a statement that he received — not one he wrote and sent. Meaning it likely was a prepared statement involving lawyers and/or comms advisors.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here's Judge Thapar, Trump's first appeals court nominee, mincing no words and saying that, in his view, Tennessee can do whatever it wants, including a total ban on abortion.
More from Thapar: "But those precedents are wrong."
But, lol. The engagement on this post tells me you can just put this idea back on the shelf.
I really want to have a sit-down with whoever was like, “Shark Tank, but instead of capitalism we make it about activism. By turning the activism into a marketable commodity. So, capitalism.”
We’re still waiting on word from #SCOTUS in John Ramirez’s request for a stay of execution in Texas. Ramirez is due to be executed tonight. Here’s the docket: supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?fi…
Here’s the underlying issue presented, a religious liberty — specifically, RLUIPA — claim, on which he is asking for a stay:
Notably, Texas AG Paxton, which opposes the stay request, is also *opposing* the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty here, which filed an amicus brief supporting Ramirez. supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/2…
We got 9th Circuit nominees, all of whom are already judges at the federal or state level: Judge Lucy Koh (N.D. Cal.), Justice Gabriel Sanchez (Cal. Ct. App., 1st App. District), Judge Holly Thomas (Los Angeles County Superior Ct., Family Law Division).
BREAKING: On a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court denies relief to plaintiffs challenging Texas #SB8, allowing it to remain in effect for now. Chief Justice Roberts joins the Democratic appointees in dissent.
Here is the statement from the Court, which has no author and is not listed as per curiam.
Here is Roberts’ dissent, joined by Breyer and Kagan, which focuses on the “unprecedented” type of law at issue here.
Seriously, John Roberts, what kind of operation are you running there?
So, I really do want to know what’s actually happening. Because there are a few different possibilities, all of which could lead — arguably — to different responses from at least some actors. Is Alito just holding the application, is the Court holding for a dissent, is the …
… Court holding because there’s no clear majority on how to deal with the pre-enforcement aspect of this and they’re hoping for an enforcement case that they can then set for argument alongside Dobbs? Or is it something else altogether?