THREADETTE: THIS. AND we still don't know 2 key points: WHAT prompted Aspen Institute to run "table top exercise" to "prebunk" story amazingly similar to reality. AND why was Baltimore FBI agent running keyword searches to flag disinformation for Twitter? /1

https://twitter.com/shellenberger/status/1907103188060381199

2/ It wasn't merely FBI feeding "hack and leak" warnings to social media. THAT IS HUGE STORY & we need to know if folks doing that knew of Hunter Biden laptop OR were fed idea of hack and leak by someone who did. BUT also what/who prompted Aspen Institute's focus on Hunter.

🚨Here is tDa terrorists filing in SCOTUS re Trump Administration's motions related to Alien Enemies Act case. 1/ 2/ SCOTUS could go 2 ways: a) granting stay b/c court must ensure it has jurisdiction & no jurisdiction here + harm to Article II warrant relief; or b) since Trump is able to remove still this case can wait...unlike others where Trump is forced to pay out money.

🚨BREAKING: Harris seeks en banc review in D.C. Circuit after panel granted Trump stay, meaning he Harris stayed fired. More details available in other threads. 1/ 2/ Here's petition: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

🚨Here's the docket for the appeal of the lower court's injunction requiring reinstatement of grants, employees, etc. of the Consumer Financial Protection Board. 1/ 2/ courtlistener.com/docket/6982173…

🚨Trump Administration files 🔥reply brief in SCOTUS in Dept. of Educ. v. California case. Trump asks for stay & vacatur of order they reinstate grants they terminated. Entire brief is worth a read for those knee-deep. A few topline take-aways. 1/ 2/ Brief highlights absolute abuse of TROs & details cases where orders entered and illustrates why district court's lack jurisdiction over broad swatch of cases & basically begs SCOTUS to put an end to it.

🧵With the flurry of federal litigation, I thought it would be helpful for the non-lawyers to provide a brief lawsplainer of federal court system. So, here it goes: Article III of the constitution established 1 Supreme court and such inferior courts as Congress may establish. 1/ 2/ Currently there are 94 "district courts" and 13 "courts of appeals," named by their circuit, 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit Court of Appeals, through 11th Circuit. There is also a D.C. Circuit Court & a Federal Circuit.

🚨Trump's response in opposition to stay notes another case had been filed recently challenging Trump's firing of an executive branch officials. In Slaughter v. Trump, Slaughter & Bedoya challenged Trump's firing of them from Federal Trade Commission. 1/

https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1905765241922965740

2/ Here's link: courtlistener.com/docket/6980119…

NEW🧵of cases against Trump Administration where proceedings have reached Supreme Court. 1/ 2/ Office of Personnel Management v. American Federation of Government Employees, 24A904: Trump Admin. seeks stay & vacatur of N.D. of Cal., injunction ordering ~ 6 agencies to offer to reinstate 16,000 fired probationary employees. supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?fi…

🚨For those asking for less lawyer-talk & more lawsplaining: Trump won YUGE victory today when appellate court held he can (for now) fire members of National Labor Relations Board (considers union issues) & Merit Systems Protections Board (considers fed employee issues) 1/

https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1905712403272405257

2/ The decision rests on Article II authority of the Executive and half-dozen Supreme Court cases discussing when President can fire officials like Board members versus when Congress can limit that authority. Opinion contains tedious legal analysis of precedent but Trump wins.

🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Trump win in case involving his firing of executive officials. Lawyer version thread to be followed by layman's thread. 1/ 2/ Opinion here of DC Court of Appeals decision in consolidated appeals of Harris and Wilcox. Trump fired Harris from Merit Protections Review Board and Wilcox from NLRB. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Trump asks SCOTUS to intervene in Alien Enemies Act case & Justice Roberts requests response. 2/ The brief is excellent and includes extensive analysis, but the bottom line is simple: Judge Boesberg LACKED jurisdiction. That's all that matters & Judge Henderson ignored that flaw.

🚨Yesterday I posted the below thread about the First Circuit (appellate court) that allowed a lower court to tell Trump he had to keep paying grants and couldn't freeze them or cancel them. I suggested the injunction really had no "bite" because it was limited to blanket decisions. 1/ 2/ Well a little bit ago the Trump Administration filed a brief in the lower court. The plaintiffs had claimed Trump was violating the injunctions because FEMA wasn't paying grants. Not so, Trump countered: They are reviewing and paying the grants, not freezing them.

🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Hearing in lawsuit against Trump Administration re preservation of Signal conversations about to start. 1/ 2/ Here's link to docket. courtlistener.com/docket/6978883…

🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: D.C. Court of Appeals tells Dellinger okay, you want to play that game, fine, we'll dismiss the lower court WITH prejudice, but NOT our opinions. 1/
2/ While I believe the better approach would have been for Court of Appeals to say there are rules on how to dismiss a case and asking Court of Appeals to do so isn't it, end result was same because Court of Appeals didn't vacate appellate decisions which was Dellinger's ploy.

🚨🚨🚨Another loss for Trump this one in First Circuit with court denying stay of lower court order. Details of underlying case and order below. This one Trump should appeal. 1/

https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1899468679403766058

2/ One Obama and two Biden appointees. Full opinion. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

🧵Some more thoughts on decision denying stay that I discussed broadly below. Judge Henderson made a fatal flaw: She concluded government wasn't likely to succeed on appeal ONLY by assuming Plaintiffs could bring an APA claim. They cannot. 1/

https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1904986413747294257

2/ As Judge Walker properly notes, APA ONLY provides for review when "no other adequate remedy in a court," and here as Plaintiffs admitted, they could have sued in habeas. SO, bottom line is Plaintiffs aren't likely to prevail on APA claims.

🚨🚨🚨WHOA! Stay denied in Alien Enemies Act case. As I said it came down to Henderson but Walker couldn't persuade here. 1/ 2/ storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

🚨BREAKING: Trump Administration file brief in response to Judge's order it "show cause" why it didn't violate Court order re the Alien Enemies Act removals of terrorists. 1/ 2/ Full brief. Comments to follow. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Trump Administration tells Judge in Alien Enemies Act case it will provide him no more information re the flights etc. and is exercising the State's Secret doctrine. 1/ 2/ Key to Trump's argument is this point: Given Trump hasn't contested they landed and were deplaned after order issued there is no need for court to know any other details.

UPDATE: So I finished listening to entire hearing and my initial "gut" remains: Walker is 100% no jurisdiction because this must be brought in habeas. Judge Wilett is 100% jurisdiction and upholding TRO. Henderson will be swing vote. 1/

https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1904242146745696678

2/ My gut is Henderson will find Walker's argument was more convincing because it was based on controlling precedent of LoBue & Wilett was based on emotional. LoBue is controlling & no jurisdiction. Walker can overcome Wilett's worst-case concerns by

🚨...jumping in:
DOJ: Says it is habeas is "jurisdictional" and not "venue." Goes to "authority" of court not steering where appropriate.
ACLU: Jumps into conversation--district court has not said anything yet about whether to bring people back. Very concerned his order has been violated and has not made decision if violated much less whether ordered back so that is not before court.
Claims gov't is admitting must be ability to contest whether you fall within proclamation is "how". D.Ct. has said he wants to figure out how that works. Neither gov't or us had answer. BUT easy ground to affirm, because there is "no process."
Gov't saying "you can have process" that's illusory because paper said they have no process.
Judge Walker: Could you have done everything in Texas D.Ct. that you did in this court. Perhaps, but law is clear you don't need to bring in habeas because you aren't seeking release. You could have filed exact same complaint that you filed here in district court. Government is agreeing each Plaintiff COULD have gone before habeas in district court in Texas.
ACLU: We could have filed a class habeas but we weren't looking to just get 5 individuals. If gov't is saying we could do this for each individual, we couldn't because we didn't know. We filed at 2 a.m., 5 a.m. enjoined re the 5 a.m. Absent a class TRO we would have had more in prison.
Judge Walker: Everything that happened a Southern District Court of Texas could have done.
ACLU: Yes.
Judge Walker: That tees up the dispute. Gov't says it a) must be habeas; and b) where detainee is, which is Texas.
ACLU: Common ground now that there must be process. We're talking to people to El Salvador one of worse prisons. Government provided zero ability to provide habeas.
Judge: Everyone who is detained can bring a habeas petition.
ACLU: Only because of TRO by judge Boasman. 2/ Judge Walker: Does it have to be brought by habeas. Hard to get around LoBue.
ACLU: That was extradition. Say it is different.