Partner at Holtzman Vogel. Former Trump 47 senior DOJ official, Kansas Deputy Attorney General and federal prosecutor. Lieutenant Colonel in Air Force Reserves.
Jun 12 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
UFC fans (me included) can breathe a huge sigh of relief as sanity prevails in DDC, where a judge allowed the fights to continue. This case presented absurd aesthetic standing theories that left Judge Mehta no choice but to deny TRO. Let’s break down precisely how absurd it was.
To get into court in the first place a Plaintiff must show they’re injured by what’s happened. Here the claim was an aesthetic injury that viewing the structures associated with the UFC event will diminish their personal enjoyment of the WH and Lincoln Memorial.
Jun 3 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
The first case I’ll break down is Talbott v. United States (the Hegseth policy case) at the DC Circuit. Since this is a case I personally argued I will refrain from providing opinion commentary and focus on what the court said.
First, Judges Wilkins and Rogers decided the Hegseth policy should be enjoined as it pertains to currently serving members based on animus but limit the injunction to the named plaintiffs in the case.