Thomas Frampton
@tframpton.bsky.social
UVA Law, visiting at GW Law, sometimes lawyer, full-time Ruth wrangler. Speaking as private citizen, outside official job duties, on matters of political/social/other concern.
Stuff I write: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=1785600
Stuff I write: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=1785600
Reposted by Thomas Frampton
New Interview: www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a...
January 3, 2026 at 9:42 PM
New Interview: www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a...
Reposted by Thomas Frampton
Expect someone in the administration may have dusted off this 1989 OLC opinion.
www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/...
www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/...
Authority of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to Override International Law in Extraterritorial Law Enforcement Activities
www.justice.gov
January 3, 2026 at 12:04 PM
Expect someone in the administration may have dusted off this 1989 OLC opinion.
www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/...
www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/...
Reposted by Thomas Frampton
But what if Maduro’s involvement in the drug trade was an “official act”?
January 3, 2026 at 3:32 PM
But what if Maduro’s involvement in the drug trade was an “official act”?
90 minutes after Trump said of María Corina Machado (who dedicated her Nobel Peace Prize to him a few days ago) was a nice lady who couldn't run the country because she had neither the respect nor support of the Venezuelan people.
Someone (unclear who) is being played extraordinarily hard.
Someone (unclear who) is being played extraordinarily hard.
How it's going.
January 3, 2026 at 7:27 PM
90 minutes after Trump said of María Corina Machado (who dedicated her Nobel Peace Prize to him a few days ago) was a nice lady who couldn't run the country because she had neither the respect nor support of the Venezuelan people.
Someone (unclear who) is being played extraordinarily hard.
Someone (unclear who) is being played extraordinarily hard.
👀
Looks like the case has been assigned to 92 year old Senior District Judge Alvin Hellerstein
January 3, 2026 at 6:25 PM
👀
Reposted by Thomas Frampton
like, we all know it's about oil. it's always about oil. but it just seems so uncouth to say the word oil so many times in the press conference announcing we've got to war for oil again.
January 3, 2026 at 6:09 PM
like, we all know it's about oil. it's always about oil. but it just seems so uncouth to say the word oil so many times in the press conference announcing we've got to war for oil again.
But will people under 30 find this funny? The joke worked last time (in part) because of the fiction it was about “freedom”; nobody in the Administration would explicitly say it was for Iraqi oil. Now he’s just screaming it.
Expect to see a lot of this classic Onion headline, from 23 years ago, over the coming weeks.
January 3, 2026 at 6:08 PM
But will people under 30 find this funny? The joke worked last time (in part) because of the fiction it was about “freedom”; nobody in the Administration would explicitly say it was for Iraqi oil. Now he’s just screaming it.
Proposed update to ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3.8:
Rule 3.8(f): A lawyer integrated with U.S. military forces as part of a law enforcement action in a foreign country shall refrain from participating in an illegal regime change.
Rule 3.8(f): A lawyer integrated with U.S. military forces as part of a law enforcement action in a foreign country shall refrain from participating in an illegal regime change.
January 3, 2026 at 5:38 PM
Proposed update to ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3.8:
Rule 3.8(f): A lawyer integrated with U.S. military forces as part of a law enforcement action in a foreign country shall refrain from participating in an illegal regime change.
Rule 3.8(f): A lawyer integrated with U.S. military forces as part of a law enforcement action in a foreign country shall refrain from participating in an illegal regime change.
The Don-roe Doctrine (or Document)
a young boy in a yellow shirt is smiling with his eyes closed .
ALT: a young boy in a yellow shirt is smiling with his eyes closed .
media.tenor.com
January 3, 2026 at 4:57 PM
The Don-roe Doctrine (or Document)
Can't wait for the U.S. v. Armstrong claim here.
I think the bigger question is this: why did Trump protect and pardon Juan Orlando Hernández, a convicted drug trafficker, while turning Maduro into a political trophy? And the answer probably has a lot less to do with justice and a lot more to do with who was useful to Donald Trump at the time.
January 3, 2026 at 4:31 PM
Can't wait for the U.S. v. Armstrong claim here.
If [any of ~100 countries whose domestic law Trump may have violated] invaded the U.S. right now, and topped the president here, on what grounds would the United States object? Or have any credibility to say anything?
If Xi Jinping invaded Taiwan right now, and toppled the president there, on what grounds would the United States object? Or have any credibility to say anything?
January 3, 2026 at 4:09 PM
If [any of ~100 countries whose domestic law Trump may have violated] invaded the U.S. right now, and topped the president here, on what grounds would the United States object? Or have any credibility to say anything?
Shockingly small distance between this (below) and the sort of theories "sovereign citizens" invoke to defeat criminal court jurisdiction over their person. Can't believe no one else noticed this one tiny thing (the fringe on the flag, incorporating oneself, etc.) that solves everything!
I regret to inform you there’s a new post telling us we’re rubes who’ve missed the obvious & clear meaning of the Const’n for a century.
This is the type of post you make when your goal is to juice engagement from those who want nothing more than to be told their policy goals are const’l commands.
This is the type of post you make when your goal is to juice engagement from those who want nothing more than to be told their policy goals are const’l commands.
December 30, 2025 at 3:18 PM
Shockingly small distance between this (below) and the sort of theories "sovereign citizens" invoke to defeat criminal court jurisdiction over their person. Can't believe no one else noticed this one tiny thing (the fringe on the flag, incorporating oneself, etc.) that solves everything!
Old enough to remember when leg-lengthening surgery was kinda understood to be inherently anti-eugenic.
December 30, 2025 at 3:00 PM
Old enough to remember when leg-lengthening surgery was kinda understood to be inherently anti-eugenic.
The new facade at the Kennedy Center feels like a real vibe shift.
December 28, 2025 at 4:26 PM
The new facade at the Kennedy Center feels like a real vibe shift.
okay, who's made the playlist for John Darnielle's "this year: 365 songs annotated"?
(only up to February, but really enjoying it so far. make him poet laureate already.)
(only up to February, but really enjoying it so far. make him poet laureate already.)
December 26, 2025 at 4:49 PM
okay, who's made the playlist for John Darnielle's "this year: 365 songs annotated"?
(only up to February, but really enjoying it so far. make him poet laureate already.)
(only up to February, but really enjoying it so far. make him poet laureate already.)
Madness at the Meiwah pickup counter.
December 24, 2025 at 10:32 PM
Madness at the Meiwah pickup counter.
Here’s another one (that supports the “this is just bad AI” theory).
They redacted a female WSJ’s first name (“Rebecca”), but not her surname, and not her first name when it’s part of her Twitter handle. They just programmed a machine to redact all initials (“S.D.N.Y.”) and female names.
They redacted a female WSJ’s first name (“Rebecca”), but not her surname, and not her first name when it’s part of her Twitter handle. They just programmed a machine to redact all initials (“S.D.N.Y.”) and female names.
December 24, 2025 at 1:02 AM
Here’s another one (that supports the “this is just bad AI” theory).
They redacted a female WSJ’s first name (“Rebecca”), but not her surname, and not her first name when it’s part of her Twitter handle. They just programmed a machine to redact all initials (“S.D.N.Y.”) and female names.
They redacted a female WSJ’s first name (“Rebecca”), but not her surname, and not her first name when it’s part of her Twitter handle. They just programmed a machine to redact all initials (“S.D.N.Y.”) and female names.
Yankee Candle level of abstraction: 4.
December 24, 2025 at 12:51 AM
Yankee Candle level of abstraction: 4.
This would be so much funnier if he hadn't already deployed Louisiana troops to Washington DC.
December 22, 2025 at 3:52 PM
This would be so much funnier if he hadn't already deployed Louisiana troops to Washington DC.
Still an Orioles fan, too.
DC residents have been refusing to call that airport anything but National for almost thirty years, we certainly can refuse to call that arts center anything but the Kennedy Center for three
December 21, 2025 at 12:51 AM
Still an Orioles fan, too.
The kind of art our government used to sponsor...
December 20, 2025 at 7:08 PM
The kind of art our government used to sponsor...
This is the Amy Coney Barrett confirmation of university president selections.
(You can tell they know this will be well-received, popular, and accepted as legitimate by the late-Friday-afternoon-before-Christmas email announcement.)
(You can tell they know this will be well-received, popular, and accepted as legitimate by the late-Friday-afternoon-before-Christmas email announcement.)
December 19, 2025 at 8:41 PM
This is the Amy Coney Barrett confirmation of university president selections.
(You can tell they know this will be well-received, popular, and accepted as legitimate by the late-Friday-afternoon-before-Christmas email announcement.)
(You can tell they know this will be well-received, popular, and accepted as legitimate by the late-Friday-afternoon-before-Christmas email announcement.)
The “deal” that UVA signed with Trump means that it is now unlawful for UVA administrators to do anything—anything at all—with the goal of addressing these shameful statistics.
Not because federal law prohibits it. But because UVA made the choice to go along with Trump/DOJ’s radical race agenda.
Not because federal law prohibits it. But because UVA made the choice to go along with Trump/DOJ’s radical race agenda.
December 18, 2025 at 1:30 PM
The “deal” that UVA signed with Trump means that it is now unlawful for UVA administrators to do anything—anything at all—with the goal of addressing these shameful statistics.
Not because federal law prohibits it. But because UVA made the choice to go along with Trump/DOJ’s radical race agenda.
Not because federal law prohibits it. But because UVA made the choice to go along with Trump/DOJ’s radical race agenda.