BLUE
Profile banner
S
southpaw
@nycsouthpaw.bsky.social
Writer, lawyer, Dodger fan, internet dog. nycsouthpaw18 at gmail.
82.5k followers822 following3.5k posts
Snycsouthpaw.bsky.social

DOJ is doing what it must in this brief, and we may even find out they didn’t go far enough in lopping off pieces of the case to fit the procrustean bed of Roberts’ opinion. But it’s still a little nauseating to see that awful and radical conceptual framework folded into workmanlike legal writing.

7

Ooeishik.bsky.social

The case is still very much alive. Trump v. United States doesn't help Donald Trump very much. We see that in Jack Smith's filing. It's a brilliant brief. Here's a review: www.youtube.com/live/qec2PWX...

0
Ttrollyman.bsky.social

Just fucking sickening

0
Vvineyarddawg.bsky.social

Strong "Nixon claiming that when the President does it, it's not illegal" vibes.

1
ENverynormalguy.bsky.social

at some point, the roberts majority is going to have to eat their vegetables. Ideally, it gets dismantled, but that takes luck and time. My only hope in the short term is that the application of this “framework” is such a shitshow that roberts is so embarrassed that he goes back to the two step

2

Robert's and Co knew exactly what they were doing and encouraging when they handed that decision down.

0
yozootoo.bsky.social

The Robert’s doctrine seems like the old Nixon doctrine, If the president did it, it’s not illegal.

0
LHlion-ohutz.bsky.social

Mildly ironic that the conservative urge for privatization is what made the plot illegal.

0
Profile banner
S
southpaw
@nycsouthpaw.bsky.social
Writer, lawyer, Dodger fan, internet dog. nycsouthpaw18 at gmail.
82.5k followers822 following3.5k posts