Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Mike Sacks Profile picture
Mike Sacks
@MikeSacksEsq
NY-17 Congressional Candidate. Democracy advocate. Former political-legal journalist. Retired competitive air guitarist. Second-Best dad ever. BlueSky mikesacks
5 subscribers
Feb 27 • 9 tweets • 4 min read
No, these people are pushing clearly unconstitutional/illegal policies precisely because they hope this SCOTUS will be a willing partner in their reactionary revolution or will be powerless in the face of departmentalist defiance—and if the people resist then poof go elections These people are seeking nothing short of an FDR-style constitutional revolution but without his political mandate to override the existing order—let alone return to the one FDR’s election repudiated. Image
Image
Feb 9 • 9 tweets • 3 min read
Dude's deliberately misreading a very short, digestible, and temporary judicial order so to lay the groundwork for going full Jackson Apocrypha in service to his movement's authoritarian agenda.

Read the order for yourself:
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco… x.com/JDVance/status… These people are all but actually up in arms over the judge's restraining "political appointees" from accessing Treasury's payment system, and lying to you that it includes the Secretary and other cabinet members, when it's clearly aimed at people like the DOGEbros. Image
Image
Image
Image
Jan 23 • 20 tweets • 14 min read
This filing appears to be the Trump DOJ’s first defense of his birthright citizenship EO Image
Image Here’s WA/AZ/IL/OR’s complaint against Trump’s birthright citizenship EO storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…Image
Image
Image
Jan 10 • 36 tweets • 5 min read
aaaaand the SCOTUS TikTok args started immediately after this Trump's first-term SG is repping TikTok to fight a law he'd likely have defended had Congress passed it before 2020
Nov 9, 2024 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
Curious if Jim Ho will renounce his defense of birthright citizenship if he thinks a SCOTUS nom depends on doing so gibsondunn.com/wp-content/upl…Image
Jul 1, 2024 • 5 tweets • 2 min read
The decision feels like Bruen in that it'll have the justices in subsequent cases going WAIT NO WE DIDN'T MEAN THAT except it'll be after Emperor Trump orders Kavanaugh to chew off Roberts's face in the supersized Thunderdome constructed on top of the Supreme Court building Hahahaha what am I saying this opinion will never be cited again if dude returns to office because they'll just Weekend at Bentham him so that he'll remain immune from whatever crimes he commits while alive or dead during his eternal reign Image
Jun 14, 2024 • 8 tweets • 4 min read
SCOTUS 6-3 invalidates the federal bump stock ban supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf… Thomas writes for the six-justice Republican supermajority saying existing law didn't authorize the Trump admin's rule.

Alito, concurring, says Congress should amend the law.

HEY CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS ALITO SAYS PASS A GUN CONTROL LAW BANNING BUMP STOCKS!
Image
Image
Jun 8, 2024 • 10 tweets • 5 min read
FedSoc’s founder comes out as a 2020 Election denier:

“[M]any Republicans, myself included, thought that the 2020 presidential election was probably stolen, even though that fact could not be proved in a court of law.” Checks out
May 16, 2024 • 15 tweets • 6 min read
Might as well get a thread started tracking Justice Jackson's emerging pro-democracy constitutional vision Jackson came straight out of the blocks in October 2022 to give full weight to the proper understanding of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Amendments as keys to our ensuring a robust multiracial democracy today:



Image
Image
Image
Image
Apr 16, 2024 • 23 tweets • 4 min read
Justice Thomas just suggested J6, legally, is no different than any other violent attempt to disrupt official proceedings Alito’s clearly for throwing out the obstruction charges against the J6 defendant here, too.
Dec 28, 2023 • 15 tweets • 6 min read
Here’s the Colorado Republican Party’s SCOTUS petition via its lawyers, who redacted their generally public contact info even though SCOTUS def won’t redact when it soon uploads the petition to the docket page. media.aclj.org/pdf/Colorado-R…


Image
QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Supreme Court of Colorado held that states possess authority, regardless of the lack of congressional authorization, to determine that a presidential candidate is disqualified under Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment and that former President Donald J. Trump is disqualified as an insurrectionist. The Questions Presented are: 1. Whether the President falls within the list of officials subject to the disqualification provision of Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment? 2. Whether Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment is self-executing to the extent of all... Sekulow making his grand return after repping Trump in his fight to keep his financial records from the Manhattan DA
Dec 22, 2023 • 16 tweets • 5 min read
SCOTUS declines Jack Smith’s request to quickly resolve POTUS immunity issue, tells DC Circuit YOU FIRST supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…

Image No noted dissents. Maybe libs trust that CADC will hand down its decision right after 1/9 oral args so to get whole resolved in time for 3/4 trial date?
Dec 15, 2023 • 14 tweets • 6 min read
2nd Circuit, sitting en banc, finds that non-transgender female high school athletes have standing to sue Connecticut for Title IX sex discrimination over the state's inclusion of transgender female athletes in track and field competitions. ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isys…

Image
We do not consider whether Plaintiffs’ Title IX claims have any merit or whether they would be entitled to the relief that they seek as a matter of equity, but rather whether the district court has jurisdiction to hear their claims in the first instance. We conclude that it does, for the reasons advocated for both by Plaintiffs and by Intervenors. First, Plaintiffs have established Article III standing at this stage in the litigation. They have pled a concrete, particularized, and actual injury in fact that is plausibly redressable by monetary damages and an injunction ordering Defendants t... CA2 says if the state made trans girls compete with boys, and "transgender girls alleged that such a policy discriminated against them on the basis of sex and deprived them of publicly recognized titles and placements, they too would have standing to bring a Title IX claim."
Sep 6, 2023 • 6 tweets • 3 min read
Translation: Sure we are openly defying a 5-4 SCOTUS ruling but we think Justice Kavanaugh will flip his vote if we come back at him with the exact argument he told us to make when he sided against us last time Alabama’s gonna “raise that temporal argument” and hope Kavanaugh thinks that the Voting Rights Act no longer should authorize “race-based redistricting.”

Question is whether Kav left that loaded gun out for immediate use or for some years from now.
Aug 9, 2023 • 7 tweets • 3 min read
Just unsealed from DC Circuit:

Jack Smith got a warrant for Trump’s tweet data from Twitter, Twitter was too a shambles to meet its production deadlines, claimed 1A as a defense, got hit with contempt sanctions, and lost its appeal.

https://t.co/oF5DgP6ZnScadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opini…
PAN, Circuit Judge:* The district court issued a search warrant in a criminal case, directing appellant Twitter, Inc. ("Twitter") to produce information to the government related to the Twitter account "@realDonaldTrump." The search warrant was served along with a nondisclosure order that prohibited Twitter from notifying anyone about the existence or contents of the warrant. Twitter initially delayed production of the materials required by the search warrant while it unsuccessfully litigated objections to the nondisclosure order. Although Twitter ultimately complied wit... All-Dem panel (Obama. Biden, Biden) rejected Twitter’s argument that the nondisclosure order was a prior restraint on speech…namely, the company’s desire to tell the public—and Trump—about the search warrant.

Twitter's contrary arguments are unpersuasive. First, Twitter claimed that the government's interest in maintaining the confidentiality of the criminal investigations was undermined by information already in the public sphere. Twitter asserted that "the cat [was] out of the bag: the public ... already [knew] that the Special Counsel [was] investigating the former President and collecting his private electronic communications." Opening Br. 25. We disagree. At the time of Twitter's challenge to the nondisclosure order, some information about grand jury subpoenas or visitors to the f...
Second, Twitter proposed two less restrictive alternatives to the nondisclosure order that it contended could address the government's concerns "while still enabling it to meaningfully exercise its First Amendment rights." Opening Br. 31. Those proposals involved revealing parts of the warrant to the former President or to his representatives. At the time that Twitter made its motion, those suggested alternatives were nonstarters because they would not have maintained the confidentiality of the criminal investigation and therefore risked jeopardizing it. …. In any event, such acti...
court to take on the unpalatable job of "assessing] the trustworthiness of a would-be confidante chosen by a service provider." Id.; see also E-Mail Accounts, 468 F. Supp. 3d at 562 (holding that a proposal "to notify someone at the [targeted] company, like a senior official or a lawyer in its United States office, of the warrant ... was not as effective as the nondisclosure order" in protecting an investigation). Twitter thus failed to proffer any alternative to the nondisclosure order that "accomplished] the government's goals equally or almost equally effectively...
Jul 28, 2023 • 7 tweets • 2 min read
This description of Alito’s “distinctive interpretive method” is a very long way of saying “Partisan Republican”

https://t.co/SbmXAfKPxpwsj.com/articles/samue…
Image I don’t say that as a smear. It’s exactly why the authors of this piece love him. They just can’t say it in so few and candid words lest they further aid in the court’s loss of public legitimacy.
Jul 10, 2023 • 16 tweets • 7 min read
Owning the libs by…proposing new campaign finance limits axios.com/2023/07/10/gop… Owning the libs by…proving Alito wrong when he went all NOT TRUE to Obama’s saying Citizens United would open our campaigns up to foreign influence
Jul 7, 2023 • 8 tweets • 3 min read
Another brutal and correct blast from @AdamSerwer theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…

The promise of originalism is that, by interpreting constitutional amendments as they were understood at the time, judges minimize the risk of lawless rulings that simply reflect their own preferences. In theory, originalism should not necessarily lead to a justice’s preferred outcome, preventing the law from being corrupted by personal bias. Perhaps you think affirmative action is immoral or bad policy; perhaps you think it largely benefits the most well-off minority students. Maybe you think the legal rationale of “diversity” used to defend it is strained. Maybe you agree with those who a...
But the issue here is: Did the authors of the Fourteenth Amendment see efforts to help Black Americans as unconstitutional discrimination against white people? They very clearly didn’t. At the time, that was the position of the men who would have been just as happy if slavery had never been abolished at all. Two sentences that at once defend the constitutionality of affirmative action while also, with the economy of four words, point to a better way forward now that it’s gone theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
The authors of the Fourteenth Amendment were trying to undo a racially oppressive labor caste system, so they needed to focus on race. They would not have been trying to do so in a “race neutral” way, because they were not a party to 20th- and 21st-century conflict over the limited number of places in the factories of elite reproduction.
Jun 30, 2023 • 10 tweets • 6 min read
Aaaaaand scene:

Alito writes for unanimous court rejecting the bonkers standing ruling for private plaintiffs, Roberts has 6-3 ruling finding Missouri has standing and kills Biden's student loan relief plan.
Alito op: supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf…
Roberts op: supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf… Image
Image
Image
Image At oral arg, it seemed Barrett was most likely to cross ideological lines on both standing and merits. So when I saw she wrote a concurrence, I expected her to explain her vote. Instead...she writes a textualist treatise on the major questions doctrine? Image
Image
Image
Jun 29, 2023 • 10 tweets • 5 min read
SCOTUS 6-3 strikes down affirmative action in higher ed. Roberts writes for the Republican majority.

Thomas writes a 58-page concurrence, and says what the majority only implies: the earlier precedents upholding higher ed affirmative action are overruled. Image The Chief's majority opinion says the Court's run out of patience for O'Connor's 25-year sunset suggestion five years early. Image
Image
May 30, 2023 • 9 tweets • 4 min read
This from @The_Law_Boy via @ballsstrikes is dead-on.
ballsandstrikes.org/law-politics/d… ImageImage Been banging on about this here for a while