Akiva Cohen Profile picture
Sep 21, 2022 36 tweets 13 min read Read on X
Hey, #LitigationDisasterTourists, remember what I said about the difference between Trump judges and Trumpist judges? The 11th Circuit just drove that home to one Donald J. Trump in an opinion issued by a panel including two judges he appointed
The ruling is stayed ONLY as to two aspects: the review of classified documents and the injunction stopping the criminal investigation. So Judge Dearie stays in place for the rest.

But since those were the only parts Trump actually cared about, this is a massive blow to him
I'm not going to go over their recap of the facts & procedural history, but it's worth noting that they specifically said that NARA was acting as it was supposed to in trying to get documents back from Trump
This also seems worth a note; calling out Trump's inconsistent positions
This is also a pretty good signpost for how they reached the ultimate decision
Anyway, on to the actual reasoning.

Always fun to get a preliminary decision that says "your opponent has a substantial likelihood of winning"

And this is as close to a benchslap directed to the trial judge as an appellate court will ever come
That was basically, "look, Aileen, when we said this was indispensable, that meant 'you can't grant it without finding this', not 'eh, do what you want, no biggie'"
Also, "for the sake of completeness" =
So what else did Judge Cannon screw up?

Also, OK, I'm wrong. This, in red? That's a benchslap. "We cannot discern why" is, effectively, "what the fuck were you thinking, trial court? This isn't a close call"
Oh, hell yes
"Declassification? Fuck off"
LOL, no, you can't use "we think the government will leak the documents" as an argument here, especially since that's not an injury to you and you haven't claimed any attorney-client privilege.
This is important. "WTF were you thinking treating Trump differently than any other criminal suspect" is a critical lesson for the court to drive home.

And the red is hugely important: No, this isn't political harassment; there's a good faith basis for potential criminal charges
Last factor ... also doesn't favor Trump.

Cannon got literally *everything but one thing* wrong here, and on that 1 thing - that there was no callous disregard - she got its impact wrong.

Just a terrible, inexplicable ruling by the trial judge
And the sum up on the merits. Back in a bit, childcare
Next, they address whether the government showed irreparable harm: Spoiler
They start with a history lesson on classification. There's absolutely no need to do this beyond making sure the public understands what's at stake here and, again, lining up "Judge Cannon, how could you even think harm was an open question?"
No, you can't separate out "national security review" from "criminal review" and you had an uncontested declaration explaining why that is.

Again, this illustrates how wildly off course Cannon went in accepting Trump's arguments without requiring any evidence from him
"look, just guess at whether the court will agree that you weren't violating the injunction" isn't a viable standard, and particularly where it impacts national security you can't leave that threat hanging out there without harming the public
Again, they're just going out of their way to signal to Cannon that she fucked up in a totally and completely indefensible fashion.

None of this should have remotely required detailed explanation from the 11th Circuit given the existing precedent
BTW, @Catsorange1, remember when you said judges make rulings, not arguments, so the fact that Cannon didn't bother trying to articulate any viable legal reasoning was irrelevant?

That's only true at the SCOTUS level. District judges? They get appealed when they're this wrong.
Anyway, the wrap-up here
OK, does the stay harm Trump?
1) You've got no right to have the docs
2) Please stop trying to make "but I don't want to be indicted" happen. It's not going to happen.
3) You didn't bother submitting any evidence that anything might be privileged.

LOL, no, you won't be harmed by a stay.
Last, does the public interest favor letting the government keep reviewing the classified docs, including for its criminal investigation?

Well, how many times were you dropped on your head as a child that you think that's even up for discussion?
To sum up, there were 2 separate 4-factor tests Cannon had to conduct when faced with the stay request: the 4 Richey factors that determine likelihood of success on the merits, & the 4 factors governing injunctive relief.

She went 1-7, & even the 1 she got right, she got wrong.
So this is, literally, a foregone conclusion. Trump takes the L.
So what does all this mean?

First, Trump is still staring at an indictment. Second, everything that happens in front of Cannon from here on out is irrelevant. The appeal on the rest of the order (which will go forward because this is just a stay pending appeal, so they need to)
almost definitely won't be decided before the government is done with its criminal investigation, and nobody really cares about the special master's review of anything *but* the classified documents.

(Trump will insist on it anyway because he needs some sort of win)
Third, yes, Trump will appeal the stay, probably first en banc and then to SCOTUS. He'll lose twice.
Last - where is the judicial system right now? Yes, it continues to hold, for the most part. But Trumpist judges like Cannon, Ho, & Oldham are still there, and they'll still be hollowing out the system from the inside if not thoroughly outweighed by competent jurists of ALL kinds
Yes, conservative as well as liberal.

Folks, MAGA hacks referred to the 2016 election as a Flight 93 moment - if we don't do it now, the country's lost! It was nonsense.

2024 really is that. The country will not survive another President willing to appoint judges like these
There's only so much weight that the rest of the judiciary can carry; the more partisan hacks get appointed to the bench, the further down the road to completely irreparable harm we travel.
For all of America's flaws, and there are many, we are remarkably lucky to live in a society where the majority of people, conservative and liberal, really do a good faith job of trying to do their duty under the law. We saw that with the 2020 election certifications, and we're
seeing it now. But it's not going to be very hard to push us to a tipping point where that's no longer the case - and that's the express goal of the Josh Hammer wing of the conservative movement.

Don't take this for granted. Please.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Akiva Cohen

Akiva Cohen 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 @AkivaMCohen

Jun 30, 2023
OK, time to get myself ratioed.

The SCOTUS affirmative action decision was legally wrong - poorly reasoned and legally silly. But in the long run, and if it spurs schools to use socioeconomic status and opportunity as the finger on the scales, it will be a net positive
Race is a blunt instrument, and I think we *all* agree that, for example, Willow Smith doesn't need or warrant any sort of bump on her college application. But Willow Smith is a WILD outlier and "but what about [insert rare exception]" isn't a useful policy framework
So yeah, it was perfectly reasonable for universities to use that blunt instrument.

As many of these university reaction statements are making clear, the burden will now be to find finer instruments that allow for the same intended benefit of taking into account the very real
Read 7 tweets
Jun 9, 2023
This thread from Yesh is a good example of a philosophical mistake I like to call "solutionism" - the belief that if a problem is bad enough then there must be a solution out there to resolve it, because "yeah, it sucks, it can't be solved for" is too unthinkable to bear
You see it a lot in the context of Israel/Palestine, with people convinced that the right mixture of fairy dust & button pushing can lead to a peaceful resolution that addresses all of the important and competing imperatives, it's just that nobody has found the right mixture yet
And we're seeing it with "a large portion of the population is willing to believe any prosecution of crimes by Trump is political"

Yes, that sucks. Yes, that's a potentially society-destroying problem.

No, there isn't a solution
Read 8 tweets
Jun 9, 2023
@yesh222 You don't worry about that, because it's not a solveable problem. You keep doing the right thing and hope that convictions and mounting evidence prevents more people from joining the conspiracy theorists, but that's all you can do
@yesh222 I said this 4 years ago, and it's proven true in every particular.

Read 4 tweets
May 19, 2023
That she was the one stealing the bike.

Literally nothing she did on the video is consistent with her new story. When her colleague came over and the kids said "that's his bike, he already paid for it" she didn't deny it, or look surprised by the claim.
Like ... how do you determine truth in a they-said-she-said situation? Watch human behavior. Throughout the video, the kids' tone is exactly what you'd expect for someone who believes their own story. Hers very much is not
And when her colleague comes and suggests that the kids get another bike, and they say "no, he paid for that bike, he unlocked it, it's his" there's exactly no reaction of "no, *I* paid for it" or "what the hell", which is what you'd expect if they were lying
Read 4 tweets
May 9, 2023
Hey, Twitter, and especially my #LitigationDisasterTourists, gather round. B/cwhile DM is focusing in on the court finding that selling videogame cheats is criminal copyright infringement and RICO, I'd like to tell you about something different. The CFAA, and @KathrynTewson
And don't get me wrong - that RICO stuff is big news that should be sending shockwaves through the cheat software industry. Cheatmakers often use resellers. Being found liable on a RICO violation means that every reseller could potentially be liable for 100% of the damage caused
by the cheat software.

And by 100%, of course, I mean 300%, since RICO comes with treble damages. Plus attorneys' fees. So that's a big deal.

As is the finding that it's criminal copyright infringement. Those are both new precedents in the area, and that's huge.
Read 21 tweets
Mar 8, 2023
I'm not inclined to forgive antisemitism, but this is more a learning opportunity than a defenestration opportunity. There are people who still legitimately don't understand that "Jew down" or "gyp" are slurs; it's just a phrase they've grown up around and use w/o thought
And yes, he doubled down when called out on it. That's almost always going to happen when someone who sincerely doesn't believe they're doing anything bigoted is called out for it in a public setting.

The real test will be whether he can learn (& apologize) as he gets more info
Also, HOLY FUCKING SHIT @pnj, you couldn't find an *actual* Jew to get a quote from, so you decided to go to a Christian LARPing as a Jew for missionizing purposes? What the absolute fuck? pnj.com/story/news/loc…
Read 4 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!

:(