LightNews LightNews
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
@ethicsmatters.bsky.social
600 followers 340 following 44 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
Sickening.
September 5, 2025 at 10:09 AM
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
Who, what, when, how — are brakes applied? Courts doing the best possible despite the reality of a political pro-executive final review at the Supreme Court. The surreality is thunderous.
August 14, 2025 at 12:39 PM
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
Good news for the survival of the Constitution.
May 22, 2025 at 2:26 PM
Reposted
chrisgeidner.bsky.social
Judge Thacker (Obama), joined by Judge King (Clinton), wrote that first concurrence. Judge Wilkinson (Reagan), then, wrote his own concurrence.

Wilkinson: "It takes no small amount of imagination to understand that this is a path of perfect lawlessness, one that courts cannot condone."
WILKINSON, Circuit Judge, concurring in the denial of a motion for a stay pending appeal: I would deny the request for a stay of the district court's order pending appeal. We deal here with what I hope is the extraordinary circumstance of the government conceding that it made an error in deporting the plaintiff to a foreign country for which he was not eligible for removal. In this situation, I think it legitimate for the district court to require that the government "facilitate" the plaintiff's return to the United States so that he may assert the rights that all apparently agree are due him under law. It is fair to read the district court's order as one requiring that the government facilitate Abrego Garcia's release, rather than demand it. The former seems within the trial court's lawful powers in this circumstance; the latter would be an intrusion on core executive powers that goes too far. And the government rightfully concedes that it was an "error" and a "mistake" to ignore this process. Mot. for Stay at 16-17. And, if it is truly a mistake, one would also expect the government to do what it can to rectify it. Most of us attempt to undo, to the extent that we can, the mistakes that we have made. But, to the best of my knowledge, the government has not made the attempt here. The facts of this case thus present the potential for a disturbing loophole: namely that the government could whisk individuals to foreign prisons in violation of court orders and then contend, invoking its Article II powers, that it is no longer their custodian, and there is nothing that can be done. It takes no small amount of imagination to understand that this is a path of perfect lawlessness, one that courts cannot condone.
April 7, 2025 at 3:50 PM
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
Dr Kildare in my jr. high heart forever
March 30, 2025 at 2:30 PM
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
Fair question.
February 7, 2025 at 11:06 PM
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
Now 97 more.
January 19, 2025 at 6:16 PM
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
Whoa.
January 13, 2025 at 4:42 PM
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
Local grown voters and leaders are key.
January 12, 2025 at 3:54 PM
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
Got it, about an hour ago. Anything new in it?
January 9, 2025 at 11:42 PM
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
Thank you. When was this reply filed?
January 9, 2025 at 11:38 PM
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
Or not. Without action, sentencing goes forward and application is moot.
January 9, 2025 at 10:32 PM
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
Did it happen??
January 8, 2025 at 6:24 PM
ethicsmatters.bsky.social
SCOTUS experts! What’s the skinny on the effort to block DJT’s NY sentencing? Likely producedure? Legal standard applicable?
January 8, 2025 at 6:07 PM