Roger Parloff Profile picture
Jan 5, 2024 12 tweets 4 min read Read on X
There’s a fair chance SCOTUS will grant cert this (Fri) afternoon in the Colo case barring Trump from ballot under § 3 of 14th Am as an "insurrectionist." If it does, look for two things: (1) timing; (2) which issues does SCOTUS want briefed? ...
1/12 Image
The Colo Republican Party (CRSCC) wants SCOTUS to address 3 issues, while Trump wants it to address 5, only one of which overlaps. Most interesting will be whether SCOTUS addresses whether Trump “engaged in insurrection”—an issue Trump raises.
/2
The party wants an expedited schedule, reaching resolution by 3/5/24 (Super Tuesday). Voter-challengers, rep’d by @CREWcrew , want even faster schedule (below), reaching resolution by 2/11/24, when in-state voters start receiving ballots. They seek 1/19/24 oral arg. ...
/3 Image
@CREWcrew ... The state Republican Party wants 3 issues addressed, but only the 1st two seem certworthy to me:
1. Does § 3 reach presidents?
2. Is § 3 self-executing? (I.e., must Congress enact an enforcement mechanism first?) ...
/4 Image
@CREWcrew ... Trump wants 5 issues addressed:
1. Is this a nonjusticiable political question (i.e., one courts can’t address because it’s up to Congress—though no one knows exactly how Congress could address it.)
2. Does § 3 reach presidents?
3. Did Trump “engage in insurrection”? ...
/5 Image
@CREWcrew ...
4. Did Colo Supreme Court violate the Electors Clause (Art II, Sec 1, cl 2) by misreading its own election laws?
5. Because § 3 bars insurrectionists from office, not from running for office, did Colo unconstitutionally add a new hurdle for running for President?
...
/6 Image
@CREWcrew SCOTUS might not specify which issues it wants briefed, in which case all would be in play. I don’t see point of addressing Trump’s 4th issue, about CO law, since it addresses only CO. Similarly, 5th just kicks constitutional crisis further down the road. ...
/7
@CREWcrew Meanwhile, the Maine case is fast approaching. Trump has appealed SecState Bellows’ administrative ruling disqualifying him to superior court, which must rule by 1/17/24. Loser then appeals to Maine Supreme Judicial Court, which rules by 1/31/24. ....
/8

bit.ly/48nFnoj
@CREWcrew ... Finally, as an overview, there have been “more than 60” administrative or court challenges to Trump under § 3, per Trump’s cert petition. Trump Campaign declines to share his list with me, but that probably includes ≥ 14 withdrawn lawsuits ...
/9 Image
@CREWcrew ... Thanks to @hyeminjhan and Caleb Benjamin, who run @lawfare 's Disqualification Tracker, we're aware of 40 lawsuits in 36 states, of which 14 have been withdrawn. ≥19 still pending, at least on appeal, including the ME & CO disqualifications. ...
/10

bit.ly/3vbrNWy
@CREWcrew @hyeminjhan @lawfare Adm challenges in IL and MA brought yesterday by @FSFP. (Not reflected on our map, which shows litigations.) Also, MN and Mich have each dismissed challenges on grounds relevant only to primaries, leaving open challenges to general election ballots.
/11

bit.ly/3vbrNWy
@CREWcrew @hyeminjhan @lawfare @FSFP ... As someone pointed out—sorry, I can’t find his post to give credit—it seems that SCOTUS can resolve all § 3 litigation *only* with a pro-Trump ruling (e.g., § 3 doesn’t apply to presidents). Affirming COLO's disqualification wouldn't seem to bind other states. ...
/12-end

• • •

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

Keep Current with Roger Parloff

Roger Parloff 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 @rparloff

Mar 24
At 4:30pm ET / 1:30pm PT—technology permitting—I will live-blog for @lawfare a hearing in Anthropic v Dept of War. Anthropic seeks a preliminary injunction against Secy Hegseth’s designation of it as a “supply-chain risk”—the 1st US company to be so designated.
/1
The dispute stems from Anthropic’s long-time insistence that its AI products not be used for (a) autonomous lethal weapons or (b) mass surveillance of Americans. Its refusal to change its terms of service to permit such uses triggered the dispute. ...
/2
If you appreciate live-blogs like this one, please consider a donation to @lawfare afterward at
/3givebutter.com/journalism/
Read 82 tweets
Mar 22
Some Anthropic updates: On 3/4, just hours before Hegseth declared Anthropic a “supply chain risk”—allegedly due to threats of “sabotage” & “data exfiltration”—his under sec’y wrote Anthropic that they were “very close” to a deal, asking to change a prepositional phrase. ...
1/5 Image
Since 3/4, govt has claimed that Anthropic sought a veto over DOD actions. But 2 top Anthropic officials assert it never did. Similarly, govt’s purported fear that Anthropic might “disrupt” the military was never raised with company & is a “technical impossibility.” ...
2/5 Image
Image
As for Anthropic’s refusal to allow its product to be used for autonomous lethal warfare & mass surveillance of Americans, Hegseth himself said those concerns were “understandable” & the commander of US CentCom echoed those sentiments, Anthropic’s head of policy writes. ...
3/5 Image
Read 8 tweets
Mar 10
The status conference in the Anthropic case in ND Calif just ended. Judge Rita Lin set a preliminary injunction hearing for 3/24 at 1:30pm PT. DOJ wanted later, but would not commit to not taking additional onerous actions against Anthropic before then ...
1/6
Atty Michael Mongan (WilmerHale) for Anthropic said they feared invocation of the Defense Production Act to "commandeer our technology" and threats of criminal consequences. Said that more than 100 enterprise customers had already expressed doubts about continuing to use them ...
2/6
said that a fintech company cut a contract from $10M to $5M and that universities & business-to-business companies have switched to other providers. Said govt is affirmatively reaching out to their customers & urging them to stop working with Anthropic. They fear an executive order may soon target them ...
3/6
Read 6 tweets
Feb 27
After MN's US Atty Rosen attacked the accuracy of his figures, Chief Judge Schiltz double-checked his list of 96 violations of court orders in 74 cases in MN for January. The recount showed 97 violations in 66 cases. But there’s more ...
1/4 Image
Schiltz then asked his judges do more research. Today he released a new list of 113 orders that were violated in 77 other cases—all in addition to his corrected original list.
2/4 Image
Schiltz comments: “The court is now aware of another occasion in the history of the US in which a federal court has had to threaten contempt—again and again and again—to force the United States government to comply with court orders.”
3/4 Image
Read 7 tweets
Feb 15
The @ACLU has filed a class action damages suit against federal & state officers over an Idaho immigration raid last October. 200 armed officers raided a horse-race festival, detaining 400 Latinos for 4 hrs. All adults & many teens ziptied & searched.
1/8
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Complaint alleges 200 officers descended on the families, guns drawn, with a helicopter, 2 drones, 5 armed vehicles, rifles, tasers, pepper balls. They allegedly grouped the Latinos (mostly ethnically Mexican) by skin color as a proxy for presumptive citizenship. No water, few bathrooms.
2/7Image
Zipties cut into wrists. When a 15yo said they were too tight, an agent allegedly tightened them further. Adults were searched & items from their pockets were put in plastic bags strung around their necks. ...
3/7 Image
Image
Read 8 tweets
Feb 5
The transcript of the MN hearing where an AUSA said “This job sucks” is remarkable for more reasons than that. It’s a searing portrait of a crisis perpetrated by depraved & oblivious high-level officials. Read it all. ...
1/7
documentcloud.org/documents/2687…Image
Judge Jerry Blackwell’s own comments deserve attention: Unlawful detention “falls on the heads of those who have done nothing wrong to justify it. ... The overwhelming majority of the 100s seen by this Court have been found to be lawfully present ... in the country.”
2/7 Image
“[Y]ou cannot ... detain first & sort out lawful authority later. ... Continued detention is not lawful just because ... an operation has expanded beyond the Government's capacity to execute it lawfully.” ...
3/7 Image
Read 7 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!

:(