Proposed Bill: Any Michigan college football team ranked #2 nationally that loses to a 6-5 rival as a 21-point favorite shall be guilty of a felony, punishable by indefinite shame and the revocation of all tailgate parties.
I am proud to introduce the O.H.I.O Sportsmanship Act to make flag planting at midfield a felony in the state of Ohio.
Behavior that incites violent brawls and puts our law enforcement officers in danger has no place on the football field.
Business idea: An orphanage in Baltimore for children there whose parents disown them this afternoon when they root for the Chiefs cuz of Taylor Swift.
A few points about the jurisdictional argument for dismissing Trump immunity appeal and returning case to Chutkan.
1. Both parties want the court to rule on merits, but panel nevertheless showed real interest in the jurisdictional argument.
Prediction: DC Circuit unanimously dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction; 2 judges concur to say they’d also reject Trump’s arguments on the merits; maybe separate concurrence by third judge saying accept presidential immunity but reject Impeachment Judgment Clause argument.
@alegalnerd There’s no reason for SCOTUS to grant cert in Trump’s case and address only jx and hypo jx. It would be transparently causing massive delay to Trump’s advantage. If SCOTUS does that, they were always going to delay everything anyway.
@alegalnerd This is the DC Circuit decision that SCOTUS reviewed in Nixon v Fitzgerald where they decided both jx and the merits of Nixon’s immunity arg.
The questions raised by the judges in oral argument in U.S. v. Trump today go to the heart of a bedrock principle of our democracy — that no one is above the law. In a democracy, a president cannot sell pardons or order the killing of a political opponent with impunity.
Fairly strong interest from panel in jurisdictional argument (Midland Asphalt), and in brief neither party buried the idea, which remains an option, especially if court also rules “hypothetically” on the merits, as it’s permitted to do.
DC Circuit raises jurisdiction and Midland Asphalt out of the box. We don’t have an “explicit” constitutional provision. Trump lawyer says it is explicit, and rests in particular on presidential power.
Trump's election interference trial is on hold while the D.C. Circuit hears his appeal on immunity. But it shouldn't be.
@AWeissmann_, @JoshuaGKolb and AO's Heather Sawyer explain why: https://t.co/0skYlBNsFX
On today's Lawfare Podcast, @AnnaBower talked to Ben Wittes, @qjurecic, @RStantonJonesDC, and @Matt_Seligman about tomorrow's oral arguments on Trump's presidential immunity defense, the merits of Trump’s appeal and how the D.C. Circuit might rule. https://t.co/BfrEStMQwc
@NormEisen is right! @AWeissmann_, @weareoversight's Heather Sawyer & I explain @MSNBC the law behind criminal interlocutory appeals, why Trump's may not be proper now, and how the DC Cir can rule on the merits against Trump's immunity claim anyway
https://t.co/MUuxS5fCH9
OK sports fans, there’s a possible appellate version of a Perry Mason moment looming in the immunity case next week, and it would send the case back to Chutkan pronto,
Opinion: This surprise argument could derail Trump’s effort to delay the Jan. 6 trial https://t.co/EYtkmT0kKe
In his reply brief last night, Trump acknowledges he needs an explicit textual guarantee against trial for the DC Circuit to hear his immunity appeal now (before trial). He doesn’t have that. Not even close. The Vesting Clause, seriously? DC Circuit must dismiss the appeal.