The Legal Docket: Appealing The Appalling

Three judges at a hearing by Honoré Daumier.

Everyone please take a deep breath and relax. The Cannon ruling led everyone into the weeds where they got lost. Leave the weeds NOW.

The big picture is still good: there are multiple investigations going on. The stolen papers case is but one of many and it may be getting back on track after DOJ filed its notice of appeal.

As Dan Rather used to say at the end of his broadcast: COURAGE.

A word about judges:

  • There have always been bad judges.
  • There have always been stupid judges.
  • There have always been corrupt judges.

Judge Cannon seems to be at least 2 of the 3. It is fair to call *her* a “Trump judge” as long as we don’t assume that means that Team Trump will win every round from now on.

A reminder:

  • 29 Republican judicial appointees were among those who rejected the BIG LIE cases.
  • The Supreme Court voted 8-1 to reject Trump’s specious executive privilege claims. The Trump appointees voted with the majority.
  • Nearly all appellate court appointees were judges before being elevated. They’re veterans, Judge Cannon is a rookie.

There is an excellent chance that the 11th Circuit will reject the Cannon ruling if it gets that far. Her legal reasoning is that shoddy. Appellate court judges care what the legal profession thinks about them. Cannon is a laughingstock. Do they want to be seen as useless hacks by their colleagues, especially in a case involving national security?

Another weird fact: Bill Barr is a raging, gaping asshole. But he’s right about the Cannon ruling. I’m not quoting that corrupt fucker but I agree the case is a red herring.

The DOJ has asked Judge Cannon to reconsider part of her ruling. Judges hate being told they’re wrong, but they hate being reversed by a higher court even more.

Here’s the NYT lede:

The Justice Department asked a federal judge on Thursday to revisit her decision to temporarily stop prosecutors from gaining access to classified documents seized from former President Donald J. Trump’s Florida home, arguing that her ruling has already hindered the government’s effort to determine whether national security had been compromised.

National security is the key to this case. DOJ has given Cannon the chance to beat a tactical retreat on part of the ruling. If she has any sense, she’ll accept the invitation. Stay tuned.

It’s time for a pep talk. Fighting fascism takes stamina and fortitude. Some of the people who talk the toughest get wobbly when things go wrong.

I’m turning over my new catchphrase to my fellow San Mateo High alum Barry Bostwick who starred in FDR: American Badass.

Thanks, Frank.

The last word goes to Bruce Springsteen:

One thought on “The Legal Docket: Appealing The Appalling

  1. ‘Wait and see’ could be good… we need to see what will actually be appealed and what will be left as is.

    As so many have noted, just about every part of the ruling is suspect. But the thing is, courts like precedent. Attorneys cite these rulings when they present their cases for consideration. If the DOJ only appeals parts of the ruling, and/or the Appeals Court only strikes down parts of the ruling, then the dubious parts remain. Which means attorneys can use the rulings as cited precedent, which in turn means district judges have to go along with or dismiss the ruling as it applies to the case they are judging. That will set up some serious issues for future cases.

Comments are closed.