For non-lawyers, this is, for the most part, an in-the-weeds ruling that doesn't have much of an effect on things. It's just about whether Trump himself should be a named defendant in the case. Judge said no here.pic.twitter.com/cjaPGDkh67
Legal Editor, @BuzzFeedNews. SCOTUS Correspondent. Nat Sec Team, covering Trump & Mueller. Sober. Gay. Buckeye. Law Dork. DMs open. chris.geidner@buzzfeed.com
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more
Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more
By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.
| Country | Code | For customers of |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 40404 | (any) |
| Canada | 21212 | (any) |
| United Kingdom | 86444 | Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2 |
| Brazil | 40404 | Nextel, TIM |
| Haiti | 40404 | Digicel, Voila |
| Ireland | 51210 | Vodafone, O2 |
| India | 53000 | Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance |
| Indonesia | 89887 | AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata |
| Italy | 4880804 | Wind |
| 3424486444 | Vodafone | |
| » See SMS short codes for other countries | ||
This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.
Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.
When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.
The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.
Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.
Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.
Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.
See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.
Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.
For non-lawyers, this is, for the most part, an in-the-weeds ruling that doesn't have much of an effect on things. It's just about whether Trump himself should be a named defendant in the case. Judge said no here.pic.twitter.com/cjaPGDkh67
For lawyers and other #lawdork folks, though, there's some interesting separation of powers discussion here! Opinion: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4637751-Doe-v-Trump-trans-ban-DC-Opinion-080618.html … / Order:https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4637750-Doe-v-Trump-trans-ban-DC-Order-080618.html …
Breaking: Judge Kollar-Kotelly keeps injunction in place against Trump's admin efforts to implement a trans military ban, denies motion to dismiss. (The move immediately followed a decision dismissing Trump himself from the case.)pic.twitter.com/kbgbaywV5o
(The newest effort at a trans military ban already was enjoined, so this changes nothing on the ground.)
Kollar-Kotelly: "In sum, it is Defendants’ view that they have preempted this lawsuit by drafting and issuing the Panel Report, the Mattis Implementation Plan, and the 2018 Presidential Memorandum. The Court disagrees." Opinion: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4637772-Doe-v-Trump-trans-ban-DC-injunction-Opinion-080618.html …pic.twitter.com/eVGcwAJOCR
In the latest attempt at banning trans people from serving in the military, those currently serving are exempted from the ban. DOJ then argues those currently serving have no standing to sue. Judge says that is not right, for several reasons.pic.twitter.com/jxu7mu0zFX
DOJ even tried to argue that those NOT serving lack standing — b/c they could join the military now b/c the policy in enjoined. CKK: "This argument is based on a misunderstanding of the Court’s standing analysis."pic.twitter.com/Ms7Cr4EHjq
What about the transgender plaintiff who is working with medical professionals on a treatment plan for transition currently? CKK is getting frustrated by time she gets to this one.pic.twitter.com/WUeWN7ogfz
DOJ also argued that the "Mattis Implementation Plan" made the original lawsuit against the trans military ban moot. CKK: Again, nope.pic.twitter.com/0Wcp3SGj7o
"Tolerating a person with a certain characteristic only on the condition that they renounce that characteristic is the same as not tolerating them at all." - Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotellypic.twitter.com/AIreDMBihU
She is right. The discussion above did "likely" make this clear.pic.twitter.com/IDBvJ4OirR
That's kinda the legalese equivalent of telling someone to take a hike at top volume, isn't it?
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.