Conservative, Textualist, Originalist. University of Chicago AB/JD. Mostly bad takes, but politely. Generally Solicitous in Iowa

Des Moines, IA
It is after 5:00 p.m. Eastern. I am officially surprised that we do not yet have a ruling in the Missouri First map case. Intrigued to see what happens there.
7
1
60
3,187
I should have waited for Central time!
4
394
Loss for redistricting. The Supreme Court, once again, stayed the implementation of the Missouri First map. Missouri voters will have to vote for Congressional candidates that are different than the candidates they voted for.
15
6
31
2,326
The crux of the merits analysis is here. Purcell gives a lot of leeway to State high courts. And in a weird sense, the Independent State Legislature theory lives (albeit here instantiated as the Independent State Judiciary theory).
3
12
940
Read the full order here: supremecourt.gov/opinions/25…
1
8
662
Tennessee banned abortion trafficking of a minor. Two abortion-rights advocates sued, challenging the part of the ban on intentionally recruiting minors to get an abortion in violation of Tennessee law. Facial, universal injunction, per Judge Stranch. I'm skeptical on this one.
2
3
34
2,124
Intrigued to see if the Chief Judge's dissent and current composition of the Sixth Circuit are enough to get this to "go" en banc. Read the full opinion and dissent here: govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCO…
1
9
465
Reading through Sutton's opinion there is a lot to chew on. Excellent writing. But here is a real kicker: Let's say the pro-choice advocates lose. That means they win. Because it means they can still advocate without violating Tennessee law. Crazy basis for an injunction
6
338
Huge win for @OhioAG & @AGTennessee against @Kalshi: the unanimous panel holds that sports-event contracts are not "swaps" and so there is not exclusive @CFTC jurisdiction per Judge Gibbons. This deepens the split with the Third Circuit. Supreme Court will be the next stop.
2
13
72
12,577
A confidential informant for the Department of Homeland Security agreed to narc on narcotics dealers for pay. But he continued to deal drugs and was caught (twice) in sting operations. Suppress? No, per Chief Judge Brennan. Plenty of evidence of guilt, no errors here.
1
2
24
1,133
Read the opinion here: media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-b…
1
474
Very fun to get to have a conversation with a bunch of folks for @HarvardJLPP's symposium on Trump v. Barbara. And the conversation on the panel got, to use Justice Barrett's scale, perhaps 2 jalapenos spicy!
.@EWess92, Solicitor General, Iowa Office of the Attorney General, explains what he thinks Trump v. Barbara settled: “I think Barbara settled one question in the near term, and that’s the president cannot, by executive order, revoke citizenship from parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present. Five justices got there through the Constitution, Justice Kavanaugh got there through statute… Presidential unilateral action is out, but I think there’s room for innovative legislation to, again, kind of poke around the edges.”
1
1
16
2,796
Huge win at the Supreme Court for President Trump and election integrity! The updated and improved SAVE database--better than ever to check to see if someone is in the country legally--can go into effect. This is a massive help in ensuring elections are safe and secure.
15
73
315
16,007
Senator Lee weighs in:
Excellent news for election security. Thank goodness we have a president and his administration willing to stand for American voters in American elections.
1
1
12
787
Attorney General Blanche weighs in:
Huge victory for election integrity! The Supreme Court granted @TheJusticeDept’s stay in revamping the SAVE citizenship verification database, which will allow states to clear the voter rolls of illegal voters. The modified SAVE system allows state and local officials to conduct citizenship verification of registered voters to keep aliens from voting. The Justice Department will continue fighting in court for secure elections. Every American should want this!
1
8
436
Can President Trump's Department of War designate Anthropic as a supply chain risk? Yes, per Judge Katsas, in a masterful and thorough opinion. In this leading exploration of the intersection of government and Super Intelligence, the government can make that determination here
6
88
431
13,273
Very interesting addition to the conversation from Georgetown Fed Soc:
.@jamil_n_jaffer addressed this issue back in April, on the inaugural edition of our chapter's podcast. See here if you're looking for a primer! open.spotify.com/episode/2rx…
1
1
7
1,045
One of the leaders of the only amicus on the winning side of the dispute weighs in:
The D.C. Circuit got it right. As @A1Policy argued in our amicus brief, no company should be able to dictate the terms of war, let alone a rich company with a clear ideological agenda that is developing technology as powerful as AI. That job is reserved for entities accountable to the American people, in this case the DOW not Anthropic.
1
1
635
When police officers approach a suspected serious criminal (with known risks of resisting arrest and potential fleeing) with a gun aimed at him, to effectuate a duly issued warrant, is that excessive force? No, per Judge Callahan.
1
38
1,374
Judge Paez dissents in part. He agrees there was no clearly established constitutional violation but he thinks that they should have only reached the second prong, and not made a holding as to whether there was a constitutional violation at all
1
4
309
I'm sympathetic to Paez's concern, but on the opinions as written agree with the majority. Read the opinions here: cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datasto…
4
281