Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Chris “Law Dork” Geidner Profile picture
@chrisgeidner
Aug 22, 2022 • 9 tweets • 4 min read • Read on X
Scrolly
Trump complains that the FBI acted "with no understanding of the distress that it would cause most Americans."

As we consider video from this weekend of law enforcement beating a man on the pavement, this line makes clear, from the start, that this is not a legal document. Image
Reminder: It was conservative, Trump-friendly outlets that got the warrant in advance of its court release — almost certainly leaked by Team Trump — yet Trump complains here about "[g]overnment leaks to favored outlets." Image
Just going to read this paragraph whenever I need a laugh. Image
"Now it all makes sense."
So many good lines, honestly. Image
Um, I'm sorry, I know I haven't practiced law in some time, but if you don't know what is in *your* numbered boxes that were taken, it seems like that's on you? There was very specific information given! Image
#protip: In your filing claiming that you're being wronged, don't lay out the details of exactly when and how you threatened the Attorney General. Image
Here's the full Trump filing, which was filed as a new lawsuit, and not in the search warrant docket or even listed as a related case (which it certainly is): storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
As to the actual request, I responded to this, in brief, in my newsletter *last* Monday: chrisgeidner.substack.com/p/thoughts-on-… // In addition, expect to see discussion of "laches," or, delaying a claim for so long that the court need not grant it. ImageImage

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Chris “Law Dork” Geidner

Chris “Law Dork” Geidner 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!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @chrisgeidner

Chris “Law Dork” Geidner Profile picture
Mar 15
BREAKING: Chief Judge Boasberg issues a classwide, nationwide temporary restraining order, blocking removal of any noncitizens in U.S. custody who are subject to today's AEA order for the next 14 days.

With planes leaving, he says, "I am required to act immediately."
Boasberg adds that planes in the air are to be turned around, says clients need to be informed "immediately."

Planes that have landed, with people discharged, he says, he cannot act on.
The next hearing before Boasberg is set for 2:30p March 21.
Read 5 tweets
Chris “Law Dork” Geidner Profile picture
Mar 15
BREAKING: A federal judge this morning issued a temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration from invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport several Venezuelan nationals with no process.

Subscribe to Law Dork for more: lawdork.comMINUTE ORDER: The Court has reviewed Plaintiffs' Complaint and Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. Given the exigent circumstances that it has been made aware of this morning, it has determined that an immediate Order is warranted to maintain the status quo until a hearing can be set. As Plaintiffs have satisfied the four factors governing the issuance of preliminary relief, the Court accordingly ORDERS that: 1) Plaintiffs' 3 4 Motion for TRO is GRANTED; 2) Defendants shall not remove any of the individual Plaintiffs from the United States for 14 days absent further Order of the Court; ...
The judge has now also set a hearing for 5p today to consider certifying a class to protect all who would be subject to the administration's effort. Date Filed # Docket Text 03/15/2025 MINUTE ORDER: The Court ORDERS that the parties shall appear for Motion for Class Certification on March 25,20 2s. ring 0 pa. The hearing oil for Cla sy Cidiconie ence or the parties and by telephone for members of the public. Toll free number: 833-990-9400. Meeting ID: 049550816. So ORDERED by Chief Judge James E. Boasberg on 3/15/2025. (Icjebl) (Entered: 03/15/2025)
The lawsuit — J.G.G. v. Trump — was filed this morning in D.C. by the ACLU and Democracy Forward.

Complaint: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…Image
Read 6 tweets
Chris “Law Dork” Geidner Profile picture
Jan 9
BREAKING: A federal district court judge in Kentucky vacates the Biden administration's Title IX rule, challenged largely for its transgender protections, a decision with nationwide effect.

Law Dork's extensive coverage of challenges to the rule can be found here: lawdork.com/t/title-ix-ruleHaving determined that the challenged portions of the Final Rule are invalid, the Court considers the appropriate remedy. While the Department argues in favor of severance, the Court remains persuaded that the three challenged provisions fatally taint the entire rule. As the Court has explained, the definition of discrimination “on the basis of sex” lies at the heart of Title IX and permeates virtually every provision of the law. While not directly challenged in this proceeding, the Final Rule brings new requirements for handling grievances, training, recordkeeping, and processing complaint...
The rule had been blocked in over half over the country as a result of several different challenges, but there had been no nationwide ruling — and appeals are pending in several appeals courts.

U.S. District Judge Danny Reeves's ruling: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Here is Reeves's judgment in the case: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…2. The Final Rule entitled “Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance”, 89 Fed. Reg. 33474 (Apr. 29, 2024) is unlawful because: (a) Title IX’s prohibition on “sex” discrimination does not include the bases or conduct covered by § 106.02’s hostile-environment harassment definition, § 106.10, or § 106.31(a)’s regulation of sex-segregated facilities and programs; (b) it violates the Spending Clause and the First Amendment; (c) it is arbitrary and capricious; and, therefore, (d) the Plaintiff States, their political subdivis...
Read 5 tweets
Chris “Law Dork” Geidner Profile picture
Nov 19, 2024
This is the shot of the night.

Schumer is filing cloture on several judicial nominations. Republicans are forcing them to go into executive session separately for each nomination. The Dems are just pushing ahead. Here was Schumer before the 10th vote, by my count, began. Schumer at the lectern, hands gripping over the top of it. TEXT: MR. SCHUMER: I MOVE TO PROCEED TO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO CONSIDER CALENDAR 711.
By the Republicans refusing to give unanimous consent, the Dems are having to go through a series of procedural votes on each nominee.

They're passing on party-line votes, but the Republicans are literally just forcing them to take hours on this.
So far, cloture has been filed for:
- Amir H. Ali (D.D.C.)
- Sparkle L. Sooknanan (D.D.C.)
- Brian E. Murphy (D. Mass.)
- Anne Hwang (C.D. Calif.)
- Cynthia Dixon (C.D. Calif.)

This voting began at 6:32 pm, C-SPAN notes, after the vote on Kidd for the 11th Circuit. Senate floor: Partial Text: "THIS VOTE SERIES BEGAN AT 6:32pm ET"
Read 9 tweets
Chris “Law Dork” Geidner Profile picture
Oct 20, 2024
BREAKING: The Fifth Circuit blocks an order from Judge Reed O'Connor that Media Matters turn over donor information to X Corp. in a lawsuit over the group's coverage of X, holding MM is likely to succeed in stopping disclosure.

More to come at Law Dork: lawdork.comX Corp., Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Media Matters for America; Eric Hananoki; Angelo Carusone, Defendants—Appellants. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:23-CV-1175 ______________________________ Before Smith, Graves, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: Media Matters, Inc., appeals the district court’s discovery order com- pelling it to disclose its donors’ information and communications. We grant Media Matters’s motion for stay pending appeal.
The panel had a far-right majority, too, with both Judge Jerry Smith, a Reagan appointee, and Judge Kurt Engelhardt, a Trump appointee, on it — so, if O'Connor had a shot, it was here. Judge James Graves, an Obama appointee, was the third judge. Opinion: documentcloud.org/documents/2524…Because X Corp.’s discovery requests are disproportional to the needs of the case, Media Matters is likely to succeed on the merits of its appeal. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). IV. Because all factors support staying the discovery order pending appeal, Media Matters’s October 2, 2024, motion for a stay pending appeal is GRANTED. The district court’s September 27, 2024, order compelling production is STAYED pending further order of this court. Media Mat- ters’s motion for administrative stay is DISMISSED as moot. Nothing in this opinion is to be construed as a comment on the ultimate merits ...
Here's my big report at Law Dork from last month on O'Connor — troubling figure in today's federal judiciary, both on the substance of his rulings and the many direct and indirect conflicts that his extensive individual stock ownership has caused. lawdork.com/p/judge-overse…
Read 4 tweets
Chris “Law Dork” Geidner Profile picture
Oct 16, 2024
I do think it's important to talk about this as it is. The GOP AGs are *asking* to amend their complaint in the existing lawsuit. It has some new claims, but most was already in their earlier complaint. And, DOJ has already said the entire case should be tossed.
They are doing this because they want to stay in front of Kacsmaryk — despite the fact that he is a Northern District of Texas judge and they are the Missouri, Kansas, and Idaho AGs. And despite the fact that SCOTUS already said the original plaintiffs lacked standing.
The AGs filed a motion for Kacsmaryk to accept their amended complaint on Friday, Oct. 11.

Before that, though, on Sept. 30, all the parties told Kacsmaryk what they thought should happen to the case now that it was back to him from SCOTUS. DOJ said it should be dismissed: 3. Defendants believe that no further proceedings are necessary or warranted in this case. The Supreme Court concluded that the original Plaintiffs “lack standing to challenge FDA’s actions,” which plainly requires dismissal of their Complaint—regardless of any attempt by Plaintiffs or the State Intervenors to amend or supplement their pleadings or add new parties. The Supreme Court’s decision highlighted legal defects in Plaintiffs’ standing, not simply a failure to carry their evidentiary burden. ... The proper course, therefore, is for this Court to immediately dismiss both existing Comp...
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

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

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

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

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(