Read on Twitter
The Colorado opinion is a landmark, even though Judge Wallace holds Trump is not an officer under 14thAm§3. The bigger point is the finding based on evidence and expert opinion that Trump 1) engaged (in his speech, which she finds passes Brandenburg)
2) in an insurrection, which she defines as "a public use of force or threat of force by a group of people to hinder or prevent the execution of law." This is a giant step forward in the position of Luttig/Tribe that §3 is self-executing.
Plaintiffs will appeal so this is on its way up the ladder, and the plaintiffs arguably can rely on deference to factual findings, though critical questions I think will be definition of insurrection and qualifications of a court to decide the issue
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
