Share this page!

Enter Twitter Thread URL to Unroll

Needs to be the full URL like: https://twitter.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on 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
Harry Litman Profile picture
@harrylitman
Jul 2 • 3 tweets • 1 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
This is a bonafide scandal. On the legal level, it means the Court decided a case that wasn't a real case or controversy as Art III requires. On the political level, it

Man cited in Supreme Court LGBTQ rights case says he was never involved washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/…
means that conservative forces in the country have effected a huge change in the law, and inroad on long-established anti-discrimination principles, based on a contrived story that exploited the judicial system and simply did an end-around the requirement of actual facts.
Finally, for the Court majority it's a huge black eye that they neverthelss will simply ignore, b/c they can, and b/c the case serves their agenda,even though they sh be apoplectic about being taken advantage of. Imagine the hue & cry if Jane Roe had been a man who made it all up

• • •

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

Keep Current with Harry Litman

Harry Litman 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 @harrylitman

Harry Litman Profile picture
Jun 20
Appreciate @Lawrence on the @TheLastWord pointing out the normal (long) life cycle of a big case at DOJ. I mentioned as well the current capital trial in Pittsburgh, a complicated prosecution but not nearly as complicated as indicting Trump for 1/6: the massacre happened in 2018
and the trial is just going on now. Really nothing unusual about that. So the calls to vilify Garland/DOJ have to rest on the idea that somewhere around summer 2021 say (the argument is they didn't get fully going for a year) they should have concluded, hey Trump might run
in 2024, and it would be a disaster for the country if he won,so we'd better abandon the normal approach and play hurry up. Talk about injecting politics into the process and treating Trump singularly, precisely as Garland was determined not to do. Worse, we're supposed to take
Read 11 tweets
Harry Litman Profile picture
Jun 20
This just came up on @allinwithchris in my discussion w/ @mehdirhasan & #ankushkhardori. It's true that @AWeissmann_ took DOJ to task for not moving faster in July of last year. But what he also made clear was
"before the hearings, federal agents and prosecutors were performing
a classic “bottom up” criminal investigation of the Jan. 6 rioters...The hearings should inspire the Justice Department to rethink its approach." ie as I pointed out on @allibooknwithchris, they were playing by the book & Andrew and others urged them to change that, or apply a
different book. nd it's a fairifferent . And that is and was a fairposition to argue -- it just shouldn't be confused, as many I think are doing, with an argument that DOJ was purposely dragging its feet. Rather, Garland's North Star, for better or worse, has been to treat
Read 5 tweets
Harry Litman Profile picture
Jun 19
Lots of passions erupting over the excellent @CarolLeonnig & #aarondavis article in today's @washingtonpost detailing the delay in opening a prosecution of Trump for 1/6. inc plenty of vitriol directed at me and others accused of being lickspittles (not exactly but it's a great
@NormOrnstein word from this week's @talkingfedspod) for the AG. Carefully read, however, the article traces the failures to go after Trump immediately mainly to DOJ's decision to follow the standard procedure of working a case from the bottom up. That was very challenging
given the enormity of the 1/6 crimes and the fact that authorities didn't even have the IDs of most of the perps. And in fact, though it's a little obscure in the article, DOJ did open up an investigation into the false electors well before Smith was on the scene.
Read 9 tweets
Harry Litman Profile picture
Jun 8
Lots of conjectures, some contradictory, swirling around. Let me just say a few things that seem relatively solid. 1) I think it’s unlikely that DOJ has decided to move the entire Mar-a-Lago case to SD Fla. there’s too much water under the bridge and it would represent such a
dramatic change of plans. 2) venue concerns are very real and very important – in brief, the courts have made clear venue is a constitutional guarantee, and if DOJ messes it up, they could lose the entire case. 3) for that reason, smith might be thinking in terms of splitting.
The case (MAL that is - Jan 6 will be in DC) up with separate offenses, charged in separate venues. And that’s consistent with the confident tone in the WaPo reporting of this afternoon. 4) but all things being equal, trial in DC is distinctly more advantageous. for DOJ.
Read 5 tweets
Harry Litman Profile picture
Apr 20
Trump tells the judge that he expects not attend the E. Jean Carroll trial that starts next Tuesday. Point 1 is that he will defend through counsel (apparently Joe Tacopina), so won't be defaulting. Point 2 is how completely it will alienate the jury and what a field
day Roberta Carter, Carroll's attorney, will have w/ it. As she told the judge, "if Mr Trump can find a way to attend wrestling championships etc, surely he could surmount the logistics of attending his own federal trial." And I don't see why she can't make those sorts of
arguments to the jury. Point 3--Trump asked the judge to instruct the jury that he wishes to be present but can't b/c of the it would occasion to the courthouse and the city. Carter mocked this claim, pointing out that NYC has done notorious terrorist crimes w/o incident.
Read 5 tweets
Harry Litman Profile picture
Mar 23
Just a few thoughts on the delay today in the Manhattan DA case. The one concrete meaningful snippet we seem to have is that the delay was ordered up by Bragg and just communicated to the grand jury. That suggests that it's not occasion to buy any kind of hesitancy or curiosity
From the grand jury. That in turn suggests that there's no strong evidence that a true bill is less likely than it was. So what was the DAs office reasoning?Fundamentally, we can't tell, but I think we shouldn't discount the possibility that Bragg just felt he needed another day
To assess a decision that could only be made when the grand jury is in session. (Also, of course, all kinds of even more pedestrian possibilities, like somebody was sick.) It could be to shore up the evidence in the grand jury, but it strikes me equally likely that it's connected
Read 6 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!

Send Email!

:(