@arevir66.bsky.social
Father, grandfather, husband and son; Latino and proud of my multi-ethnic /racial family; retired attorney and current (mostly) education volunteer; liberal and progressive; rule of law believer; dog person; and traveler
Contracts are what require the payment. FEC is not a party to them.
November 26, 2025 at 6:34 AM
Contracts are what require the payment. FEC is not a party to them.
Judge Currie was designated to decide questions "concerning the appointment, qualification, or disqualification" of the EDVA's US Attorney or its office. Having made her ruling, issues regarding the govmnt's ability (or lack thereof) to resuscitate the indictment belong to Judge Nachmanoff.
November 24, 2025 at 6:52 PM
Judge Currie was designated to decide questions "concerning the appointment, qualification, or disqualification" of the EDVA's US Attorney or its office. Having made her ruling, issues regarding the govmnt's ability (or lack thereof) to resuscitate the indictment belong to Judge Nachmanoff.
Learned a lot thanks to you. Will never see that movie.
November 23, 2025 at 1:57 PM
Learned a lot thanks to you. Will never see that movie.
Reposted
In America, juries have been offering far more resistance to Trump than Democratic politicians - maybe that's why she wants rid of them.
November 20, 2025 at 12:15 PM
In America, juries have been offering far more resistance to Trump than Democratic politicians - maybe that's why she wants rid of them.
No 5th Circuit. Redistricting cases are heard by 3-judge panel: the randomly assigned district court judge plus 2 assigned by the appellate circuit's chief judge, one of whom has to be an appellate judge. 28USC§2284. The panel's decision is directly appealable to SCOTUS. 28USC§ 1253. No cert needed.
November 20, 2025 at 3:02 AM
No 5th Circuit. Redistricting cases are heard by 3-judge panel: the randomly assigned district court judge plus 2 assigned by the appellate circuit's chief judge, one of whom has to be an appellate judge. 28USC§2284. The panel's decision is directly appealable to SCOTUS. 28USC§ 1253. No cert needed.
Even if FL doesn't disbar her, the E.D.VA can rescind her pro hac vice status and bar her from appearing before it. This would essentially kill her chance of being the US Attorney there. She would also have to report such suspension to any other court she wants to practice before.
November 19, 2025 at 6:33 PM
Even if FL doesn't disbar her, the E.D.VA can rescind her pro hac vice status and bar her from appearing before it. This would essentially kill her chance of being the US Attorney there. She would also have to report such suspension to any other court she wants to practice before.
Actually worse than your explanation. Halligan actually did not bring an altered version to the grand jurors. She only shared it with two of them, had one (foreperson) sign it and submitted it to the court as if it had been considered by the entire grand jury.
November 19, 2025 at 5:54 PM
Actually worse than your explanation. Halligan actually did not bring an altered version to the grand jurors. She only shared it with two of them, had one (foreperson) sign it and submitted it to the court as if it had been considered by the entire grand jury.
Even if FL doesn't disbar her, E.D.VA court should pull her pro hac vice admission & bar her from appearing before it. The 2 NC AUSA's assisting her & Bondi should also have pro hac vice status pulled. They submitted false affidavits. The court shouldn't have to extract the truth through crossexam.
November 19, 2025 at 5:41 PM
Even if FL doesn't disbar her, E.D.VA court should pull her pro hac vice admission & bar her from appearing before it. The 2 NC AUSA's assisting her & Bondi should also have pro hac vice status pulled. They submitted false affidavits. The court shouldn't have to extract the truth through crossexam.
Two Trump appointees (one Obama's). Barely 8 pages to destroy and reject Trump's arguments. I didn't even know that appellate opinions could be this short!
November 18, 2025 at 6:21 PM
Two Trump appointees (one Obama's). Barely 8 pages to destroy and reject Trump's arguments. I didn't even know that appellate opinions could be this short!