Nate
LightNews LightNews
banner
natewhite.bsky.social
Nate
@natewhite.bsky.social
210 followers 480 following 300 posts
legal realist, bar waitin guy, civil libertarian, justice douglas and chancellor mccormick stan. opinions my own
Posts Replies Media Videos
natewhite.bsky.social
the biden appointees' concurrence is completely on point.
MYRNA PÉREZ, Circuit Judge, joined by EUNICE C. LEE, BETH ROBINSON, and SARAH A. L. MERRIAM, Circuit Judges, concurring in the denial of rehearing en banc: Defendant-Appellant appealed a civil judgment against him for sexual assault and defamation, challenging several of the district court’s evidentiary rulings. For the reasons discussed at length in its unanimous opinion, the panel, on which I sat, found no reversible abuse of discretion. See Carroll v. Trump, 124 F.4th 140 (2d Cir. 2024) (per curiam). The panel applied the now-axiomatic rule that, when reviewing evidentiary determinations, “an appellate court must defer to the lower court’s sound judgment, so long as its decision falls within its wide discretion and is not manifestly erroneous.” United States v. Tsarnaev, 595 U.S. 302, 323 (2022) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). The dissenting opinion would have us stray far from our proper role as a court of review. Without acknowledging the deferential standard we are duty-bound to apply, the dissenting opinion offers several arguments, many of which were not raised by Defendant to the panel or in his petition for rehearing. Simply re-litigating a case is not an appropriate use of the en banc procedure. In those rare instances in which a case warrants our collective consideration, it is almost always because it involves a question of exceptional importance or a conflict between the panel’s opinion and appellate precedent. Fed. R. App. P. 40(b)(2), (c). The dissenting opinion ignores this rule of restraint. It points to no exceptionally important issues, no cases that actually conflict with the panel’s decision, and no persuasive justification for review of this case by the full Court. Because there was no manifest error by the district court, and because the standard for en banc review has not been met, I concur in the denial of rehearing en banc
June 13, 2025 at 2:37 PM
natewhite.bsky.social
“Unusual”
March 14, 2025 at 9:20 PM
natewhite.bsky.social
Not sure if this counts, but at a diner in central PA
February 24, 2025 at 4:46 PM
natewhite.bsky.social
@phillies.com free post idea
meme of the "we're talkin bout the fightins" guy but instead of "phillies return to south philadelphia" it says "phillies join bluesky"
January 30, 2025 at 12:22 AM
natewhite.bsky.social
Good, but move for sanctions and file a bar complaint too
January 23, 2025 at 6:42 PM
natewhite.bsky.social
JFC. Meta has blocked search terms like “Democrat” and “Biden.” Think this is just their anti politics thing? Check out what search terms they haven’t blocked.
“democrat” search results hidden on insta “Biden” search results blocked on meta Trump search result works on insta Republican search result works on meta
January 21, 2025 at 12:24 PM
natewhite.bsky.social
you’re right
January 21, 2025 at 12:18 AM
natewhite.bsky.social
chefs kiss at this dig
In other words, in Defendants’ view, a stockholder vote can be deployed to reverse any form of judicial ruling, whatever the ruling, no matter how final. “Vox populi, vox dei"
December 2, 2024 at 10:57 PM
natewhite.bsky.social
omg pause was jones suggesting that vladeck is causing death threats against kacsmaryk????
‘Get a Beer’ After Jones spoke, Vladeck attempted to defuse the exchange, lightheartedly suggesting that they “just go get a beer and have a chat.” But Jones responded by saying she had “studied” Vladeck and then held up a pile of papers she said contained printed copies of his writings and tweets, before proceeding to read out specific tweets of his that she considered personal attacks. The “consequence” of these attacks, she said, is that Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee who hears all cases filed in the Northern District of Texas’ Amarillo division, is under round-the-clock protection, and an individual was indicted for making a death threat against him.
November 15, 2024 at 7:57 PM
natewhite.bsky.social
apparently the CEO is not happy about it lmao
From wikipedia: Frequent users have called posts on the platform "skeets",[17][18] which is a blend of "sky" and "tweets",[19] but also a slang word for ejaculation,[20][21][22] despite CEO Jay Graber pleading with users not to call them that
November 12, 2024 at 5:03 PM
natewhite.bsky.social
Peace out Twitter
October 12, 2023 at 4:31 PM
natewhite.bsky.social
yesterday I reported this tweet and was told it did not break any rules 3 or 4 hours later.
September 9, 2023 at 10:37 AM