CNN Legal Analyst; Former Fed Prosecutor SDNY; Lecturer, Columbia Law; Adjunct Clinical Prof, NYU Law; govt ethics/anti-corruption specialist; fervent Janeite
Oct 24, 2020 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
Friday night legal tip: Want to know what to say to those who claim their “rights” are violated by mask orders? First, ask them what legal right they are claiming. The answer can only be something like “right to ‘liberty’” or “right to do what I want” bc there’s nothing else. 1/5
You can then say liberty rights are not absolute by a long shot, and that seat belts, drinking ages, and the illegality of certain narcotics are examples where the govt can legally regulate behavior for public health reasons. And in fact mask mandates are on stronger grounds 2/5
Sep 7, 2018 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
/1 Here are some thoughts on the GP sentence of 14 days’ imprisonment. While statutory max was 5 years, driving force of sentence is sentencing guidelines range, which was 0-6 months. It’s low because GP had no criminal history, and the starting value is low for this crime,
/2 making false statements to fed officials. Judges typically sentence at the low end. Here since the low end would have been non-incarceration (probation), there was a good chance of a sentence above the low end. I thought that given the seriousness of the investigation about
Aug 25, 2018 • 9 tweets • 2 min read
Yes @waltshaub, happy to! Immunity is fairly common in grand jury investigations (almost all investigations conducted by the US Atty are GJ investigations, the GJ is where the power to subpoena and take testimony under oath come in). Immunity is tied to the specific testimony
at issue. Here, SDNY was investigating the Cohen/AMI payments as campaign finance violations and learned that Cohen was paid for “legal services” that was actually a reimbursement for the Stormy payoff, so they subpoenaed the Trump Org/Weisselberg, presumably for both documents
