General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAppeals Court panel *grants* DOJ request for a stay of parts of Judge Cannon's ruling.
Link to tweet
Full ruling
https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000183-625b-da48-a3e3-e2ff83050000
Brother Buzz
(36,423 posts)Totally a Red Letter Day, Baby!
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)daily surely should not be surprised since we now know this was always a possible outcome.
And yet many people have been tearing their virtual hair in fear and frustration. Did they listen wrong, miss or misunderstand this possibility? Were they mislead by misleading media coverage? Both?
All this is going to go on for years, every day a chance to be too smart and cool to be jerked around.
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,176 posts)TFG is having a bad day
Nevilledog
(51,094 posts)Very fast.
SleeplessinSoCal
(9,112 posts)Marius25
(3,213 posts)court further delaying things.
Interesting to note, 2 of the 3 judges are Trump appointees (Grant and Brasher). Rosenbaum is an Obama appointee.
WarGamer
(12,440 posts)Nevilledog
(51,094 posts)elleng
(130,895 posts)Johnny2X2X
(19,060 posts)Biden, not Trump has the power to declassify things.
This is an absolutely devastating ruling for Trump and the SCOTUS will not help him.
Trump is going to be indicted. That is guaranteed now.
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,341 posts)We begin, as the district court did,with callous disregard, which is the foremost consideration in determining whether a court should exercise its equitable jurisdiction. United States v. Chapman, 559 F.2d 402, 406 (5th Cir. 1977). Indeed, our precedent emphasizes the indispensability of an accurate allegation of cal-lous disregard. Id. (alteration accepted and quotation omitted). Here, the district court concluded that Plaintiff did not show that the United States acted in callous disregard of his constitutional rights. Doc. No. 64 at 9. No party contests the district courts finding in this regard. The absence of this indispensab[le] factor in the Richey analysis is reason enough to conclude that the district court abused its discretion in exercising equitable jurisdiction here. Chapman, 559 F.2d at 406. But for the sake of completeness, we consider the remaining factors.
My interpretation: Judge Loose Qannon had no legally supportable excuse for accepting this in the first place, but we'll go through the rest of it just for the pleasure of chastising and ridiculing her incompetent self, anyway.
Nevilledog
(51,094 posts)Link to tweet
Steve Vladeck
@steve_vladeck
·
Follow
Eleventh Circuit Rule 35-4 expressly prohibits en banc reconsideration of panel rulings on applications for stays.
In English, if Trump wants to continue to defend Judge Cannon's injunction, his only remaining option is #SCOTUS (where, IMHO, he'll lose):
https://ca11.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/courtdocs/clk/Rules_Bookmark_AUG22.pdf
Image
5:49 PM · Sep 21, 2022
triron
(22,001 posts)jcgoldie
(11,631 posts)elleng
(130,895 posts)drray23
(7,627 posts)A partial stay.
drray23
(7,627 posts)Judge Rosenbaum was appointed in 2014, Braun and Brasher in 2018 and 2020.
It had been pointed out many times that's it's not a given that a judge will vote to favor Trump even if they were nominated by him.
He repeatedly lost during the 2020 election litigation with many of these alleged voting fraud cases in front of judges he had nominated.
Same here. Of course Cannon is an extreme counterexample.
MaryMagdaline
(6,854 posts)How the hell does plaintiff have a PERSONAL INTEREST in anything marked classified?!