(In Trump’s America, at least)

The blogger in that piece seems to believe very strongly that the government’s timelines were reasonable. I never agreed w/that. Cases that big just aren’t tried as quickly as Trump’s critics asserted.

Either way, Barrett got yesterday’s story right. And he’s no longer at WaPo, which probably helps

He’s the opposite of a hack. This is some of the most thorough and accurate reporting on one of my cases that I’ve ever encountered.

One point that wasn’t completely clear in the article is that the Virginia statute as applied in a situation like my client’s is clearly unconstitutional. Mere harassment of a public official in the context of political speech is without question protected by the 1st Amendment.

2/2

[self-flagellating SJWs = the uncompensated founding members and long-time core of JFV, incl. many public defenders. We raise money so we can pay our excellent ED (Rob) and comms director (Kelly), and ensure JFV continues to be sustainable and effectively advocate for true justice]

And, I will delete my original post since it’s not a fair judgment of you. My bad.

That said, I apologize for suggesting you’re a right winger. The “about” section of your website makes it sound like the ArlNow/AlxNow arrangement is a more local version of a Bezos/WaPo or Sinclair/WJLA situation. Glad to be wrong.

Well then, you got this one wrong, IMO—this doesnt come remotely close to crossing a line into speech not protected by the 1A. As a publisher, I’m sure you also know that the lawfulness of anti-MAGA speech is a matter of considerable public interest right now. It’s important to get the law right.

I didn’t call you right wing, Ryan, nor did I call you worthless. You know your company’s ideological leanings. And the biggest problem here is the headline, which I imagine you did not write—it’s inaccurate, feeds into a right wing trope & unfortunately it’s all most people will see/internalize.

And every public defenders office on god’s green earth

Read the article