Akiva Cohen Profile picture
Sep 21 36 tweets 13 min read
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

Sep 22
Yes, what the DeSantis administration is doing to immigrants in Texas is criminal. But let's pretend for a moment it wasn't. That there was no specific statute that adequately covered "lying to vulnerable people to get them to participate in a stunt that harmed them"

OK. So?
Lot's of morally repugnant things aren't criminal.

Being a neo-nazi isn't criminal. Cheating on your spouse isn't criminal. Mocking disabled people isn't criminal.

"OK, was what our governor/candidate did criminal?" should not remotely be the standard
What DeSantis did was morally repugnant.

He stole from the people of Florida, taking money appropriated for transporting illegal immigrants from Florida to other jurisdictions and using it to benefit him personally by transporting *legal* migrants from Texas ...
Read 9 tweets
Sep 22
Those of Trump's lawyers who are remotely competent (and Kise is) are currently considering kidnapping their client and hiding him in a bunker.

He just said "I implicitly declassified it with the act of sending the docs to Mar-a-Lago" - that BURIES him on 793
Seriously. 793 *does not require* the documents to be classified. Just that they contain national defense information that could harm the US if disclosed.

But "I declassified" could still have been a potential defense under 1 and only 1 circumstance:
If he could say that in his capacity as commander in chief, he made a document by document decision that the information those documents contained could not jeopardize national security if revealed.
Read 6 tweets
Sep 22
BTW, a coda.

Remember a little while ago I said that Trump's entire play through this classified documents issue basically couldn't have been more perfectly designed to ensure he'd get indicted if he tried? Every move basically forcing DOJ's hand towards an indictment?
Well, DOJ currently has a stay of a ruling that said they couldn't use the contents of the classified docs to indict him yet.

But there's no guarantee that stay remains in place. No guarantee that SCOTUS doesn't hand Trump a win. It shouldn't, probably won't, but no guarantee
And, um ...
Read 7 tweets
Sep 21
Hey, #LitigationDisasterTourists - at about 11pm last night, the US filed its 11th Circuit response on its motion to stay.

As Zuma would put it, let's dive in

(Yeah, I've got little kids, and that show's watchable. It is what it is)
This is how you open a reply brief:

Reset the factual situation
We showed XYZ
Their opp does nothing.

And it hammers the key point: When push comes to shove, Trump has no substantive argument - so much so that they never even really tried pretending otherwise Image
Then immediately onto Schrodinger's Declassification, making the point that (1) he hasn't actually said he did that, so it can't be a basis to grant relief and (2) even if he'd done it, it wouldn't change the analysis Image
Read 28 tweets
Sep 20
Hey, #LitigationDisasterTourists, Trump has filed his 11th Circuit opposition to the government's motion to stay Judge Cannon's order with respect to the 100 documents bearing classified markings. Let's do a live read?
Background: The government basically rehashed its stay application that Cannon denied, this time filing it in the 11th Circuit and using phrases like "of course 'documents bearing classification markings' are easy to segregate, THEY ARE THE ONES WITH CLASSIFICATION MARKINGS"
It was framed, essentially, as a "Motion to say 'what the fuck, Judge Cannon?'" based on the basic principles of "Trump can't have a possessory interest in documents with classification markings, or any conceivable privilege in them"

Now Trump is responding
Read 35 tweets
Sep 19
Hey, #LitigationDisasterTourists, we have 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨developments 🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨 in the Mar-a-Lago litigation.

Requires some background, but let's just say it looks like TFG is going to regret suggesting Judge Dearie as the Special Master
So on 9/16, Judge Dearie issued an order directing the parties to submit a proposed agenda for the 9/20 preliminary conference. The US did that earlier today, & mentioned that Dearie had circulated (to the parties) a draft Case Management Plan storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Trump's response, though? That says a lot.
Read 20 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 on Twitter!

:(