In a 57-page opinion, the D.C. Circuit has rejected, as expected, former President Donald Trump's sweeping immunity claim. Many of us anticipated this result. Here is the opinion storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
...Notably, the panel rejected the claim of many critics that there should be no appellate review. However, it categorically rejects the claim of Trump that he is entitled to immunity as a private citizen...
...The question is now whether Smith will again seek to curtail the time or options for Trump in appealing this decision. Trump has weeks to file for a full en banc review. He was previously unsuccessful in that effort with the Supreme Court.
...Crunching the numbers, Trump can seek corrections in the short term but, even without a correction to the opinion, he has 45 days to seek an en banc where the government is a party. He then has 90 days after the rejected of any en banc decision. ...
...So, even without factoring in review time for the circuit, Trump could extend this process 135 days absent a successful move to expedite. The 90 day period alone would put a petition into May. Any rejection of appeals, without an expedited calendar, puts this into the summer...
...That is without delays or a successful grant on by the D.C. Circuit (unlikely) or the Supreme Court (uncertain). After that appellate line is tied off, the parties would have to return to the trial court to resume the pre-trial work, which could take months. That puts the trial very close to the election and would raise obvious concerns given the long-standing DOJ policy to avoid trials with a few months of an election.
...While Smith will likely try again to expedite, the question is why the Supreme Court would suddenly see a need to curtail the time or process when it previously denied such efforts. There is no longer a scheduled trial on the docket and Smith is the prevailing party. That is not ideal for a motion to expedite further appeals.
...Notably, in a footnote at the end of the decision, the panel declines look at the merits of the threshold challenge that "the appointment of Special Counsel Smith is invalid because (1) no statute authorizes the position Smith occupies and (2) the Special Counsel is a principal officer who must be nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate."
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Rep. Ro Khanna (D., Cal.) gave Shannon Bream one of the most convoluted and conflicted explanations for voting against the Green censure because "he did not engage in violence . . . and I ultimately a supporter of free speech. . . and he had a free speech right."...
...Is that now the standard? You can disrupt joint sessions so long as you do not physically assault the president or others. That would be a crime that is already covered by the criminal code. Censure is about ethical conduct...
...The suggestion that Green had a protected "right of free speech" is ridiculous. Just as the deplatforming speakers in higher education is not protected, it is certainly not a right on the house floor. Green has an unfettered right outside of session...jonathanturley.org/2025/03/07/we-…
Green was censured, but only 9 Democrats joined in the motion. The Democrats then refused to clear the well and disrupted Speaker Johnson's efforts to complete the censure process. The sound you heard was the Democratic party hitting rock bottom in this disgraceful display...
Faced with the first member to be expelled during a joint session address, the Democrats followed a censure over his disruption by disrupting the business of the House. Johnson showed admirable restraint and put the house into recess...
...With this vote and the subsequent protest in the well, the party has cut itself adrift from any principle of decorum or civility. It turns out that only 8 Democrats voted for the motion. Two voted present. Green said he would do it again and the rest of the party supported him
The 1st Circuit just held that parents have no right to know about their 11-year-old changing gender in school. This "unwritten policy" was viewed as overriding parental rights. The decision is defended as a reflection of our "pluralistic society"...ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/file…
...The court wrote: "our pluralistic society assigns those curricular and administrative decisions to the expertise of school officials, charged with the responsibility of educating children." There is no more cherished right that citizens possess than raising their children...
...Indeed, the right to raise one's children according to your own faith and values is the touchstone of freedom. Conversely, the subordination of such rights is the harbinger of state tyranny...
I am a bit confused. New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy just bragged that he has an undocumented person living above his garage, adding "good luck to the feds coming in to try to get her.” How exactly is that good for this person to be staked out like political game to make a point?...
...If Murphy wanted to help this person, why would have parade her location and position in an interview to thrill his base? There is something in Matthew 6:3 that might be usual for Murphy...
...It is also unclear what Murphy is suggesting that he would do if ICE were to attempt to bring the person into custody. ICE is focusing on criminal aliens in the current enforcement push and there is no reason to believe that this person would be on that list...
Kash Patel is giving his opening statement. This is clearly going to be a rough hearing. Nevertheless, his life's story as the child of Indian immigrants speaks to the American dream and values. Notably, he served as a public defender, a rare credential to head the FBI.
...This has the feeling of the second confirmation hearing for Patel. The Democrats converted the Bondi hearing into a litany of attacks on Patel. This is likely to devolve quickly into name-calling and "are you or have you ever been a member of QAnon" confrontations...
...Interesting exchange with Durbin. Patel just said that he does not agree with the pardons extended to those who committed violence against law enforcement officers...
President Biden has pardoned Dr. Fauci, General Milley and members of the House Jan. 6 committee and their staff. With his declaration that the Equal Rights Amendment is suddenly part of the Constitution, it is the latest use of presidential powers as a type of performative art.
...I previously wrote how these "white knight" pardons would be used to sustain the "death of democracy"
narrative by claiming that, but for Biden, enemies would have been rounded up and frog marched to the federal pen... jonathanturley.org/2024/12/17/the…
...In reality, these pardons will not absolutely protect these individuals from being subpoenaed to give new testimony on prior claims. Lying in such interviews or hearings would constitute new criminal acts...