Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • About

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
chrisgeidner's profile
Chris Geidner
Chris Geidner
Chris Geidner
Verified account
@chrisgeidner

Tweets

Chris GeidnerVerified account

@chrisgeidner

Legal Editor, @BuzzFeedNews. SCOTUS Correspondent. Nat Sec Team, covering Trump & Mueller. Sober. Gay. Buckeye. Law Dork. DMs open. chris.geidner@buzzfeed.com

Washington, D.C.
buzzfeednews.com/author/chrisge…
Joined March 2009

Tweets

  • © 2018 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    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

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    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

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    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

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Orin Kerr‏Verified account @OrinKerr May 21
      Replying to @DrMamaEsq

      1/ I think some Justices do it simply because it gets media coverage. RBG in particular seems to be very attuned to whether Congress is listening to her dissents in statutory cases.

      2 replies 1 retweet 1 like
    2. Orin Kerr‏Verified account @OrinKerr May 21
      Replying to @OrinKerr @DrMamaEsq

      2/ With that said, I don't get why the media or the public cares. It's just summarizing to 100 people what is in a public document that I gather is quickly read by tens of thousands of people. Sort of quirky that it gets attention when substance is same as in the document.

      2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes
    3. William Baude‏Verified account @WilliamBaude May 21
      Replying to @OrinKerr @DrMamaEsq

      Isn’t it just a way for judges to label “this is one of my most important dissents”? I think it would work the same if we gave them each a red star they could use about 1/term.

      3 replies 0 retweets 14 likes
    4. Jennifer Romig‏ @JenniferMRomig May 21
      Replying to @WilliamBaude @OrinKerr @DrMamaEsq

      There was a business study showing that the exact same text is received more favorably when spoken/heard than when written/read. Something about the act of speaking it and compelling an audience is qualitatively different, beyond a special asterisk labeling “IMPORTANT OPINION.”

      1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes
    5. LaToya Baldwin Clark | DrMamaEsq‏ @DrMamaEsq May 21
      Replying to @JenniferMRomig @WilliamBaude @OrinKerr

      Right, which is the reason why the justices do it. But the media coverage is different, I think. Most lay people didn’t actually listen to her reading it. (I didn’t!) But perhaps even when people know that something was spoken, there is an impact?

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    6. Richard M. Re‏ @RichardMRe May 21
      Replying to @DrMamaEsq @JenniferMRomig and

      I agree that orality matters here. Probably the leading discussion is Guinier “Demosprudence through dissent” https://harvardlawreview.org/2008/11/demosprudence-through-dissent/ …

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    7. Richard M. Re‏ @RichardMRe May 21
      Replying to @RichardMRe @DrMamaEsq and

      And now for some anecdote: I can immediately think of spoken dissents that impressed me in part because of the conviction I could hear in the speaker’s voice. And I think that can come across in a radio or podcast snippet, for example.

      2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
    8. Orin Kerr‏Verified account @OrinKerr May 21
      Replying to @RichardMRe @DrMamaEsq and

      I guess I'm quirkily focused on what is written in the opinions. For the majority, that's the binding language; for the dissent, that's what so many will read. They get all the opportunity to express passion, outrage, fury, & conviction in unlimited words in the US Reports. etc.

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
    9. Chris Geidner‏Verified account @chrisgeidner May 21
      Replying to @OrinKerr @RichardMRe and

      Taking that logic to an extreme end, oral arguments should be closed sessions, no reporters or observers allowed.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    10. Orin Kerr‏Verified account @OrinKerr May 21
      Replying to @chrisgeidner @RichardMRe and

      I think taking the logic to an extreme end indicates that they shouldn't read summaries of majority opinions, either -- which I think they shouldn't.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      Chris Geidner‏Verified account @chrisgeidner May 21
      Replying to @OrinKerr @RichardMRe and

      By summaries, do you mean news reports or the syllabus or both?

      7:30 PM - 21 May 2018
      2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Orin Kerr‏Verified account @OrinKerr May 21
          Replying to @chrisgeidner @RichardMRe and

          Sorry, I meant the summaries of their majority opinions that the Justices read in open court. Perhaps it made sense pre-Internet, but these days it seems to just mean that they keep everyone waiting online for the opinion while they read a summary to 100 people.

          2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
        3. Chris Geidner‏Verified account @chrisgeidner May 21
          Replying to @OrinKerr @RichardMRe and

          Oh, well. I’d rather have oral arguments live-streamed, in which case, decisions could be as well. (I imagine you’d dislike that greatly.)

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. Orin Kerr‏Verified account @OrinKerr May 21
          Replying to @chrisgeidner @RichardMRe and

          I have mixed views of livestreaming, but if everyone could watch live, I wouldn't dislike the decision readings, at least beyond concerns about them playing to the public. (But my original concern was just about press coverage, not what the Justices do.)

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        5. Chris Geidner‏Verified account @chrisgeidner May 21
          Replying to @OrinKerr @RichardMRe and

          Right, and I think press coverage is trying to share our genuine view of why justices read dissents. I think RBG sees it as a lever she can pull once a term or so to make a point. It’s her bell-ringing, and others do so as well (though less often).

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        6. Orin Kerr‏Verified account @OrinKerr May 21
          Replying to @chrisgeidner @RichardMRe and

          So in effect, the Justices wishing to influence future public debate about that issue becomes the story, making it newsworthy. Interesting. I suppose that's right, with the caveat that I don't think that's a good thing. http://volokh.com/posts/1193284491.shtml …

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        7. Chris Geidner‏Verified account @chrisgeidner May 21
          Replying to @OrinKerr @RichardMRe and

          I mean, that’s often what dissents aim to do! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I’m not sure we disagree all that much; I think you just want a law prof press, whereas I think the reality is that people care about why justices like Scalia or Ginsburg are dissenting, so capturing that is valuable.

          1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
        8. Chris Geidner‏Verified account @chrisgeidner May 21
          Replying to @chrisgeidner @OrinKerr and

          We heard and read about Scalia’s Lawrence dissent for a dozen years. He read it from the bench.pic.twitter.com/eQL3AAC4ND

          1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
        9. Orin Kerr‏Verified account @OrinKerr May 21
          Replying to @chrisgeidner @RichardMRe and

          True, but I'm skeptical that we wouldn't have heard or read about it if he hadn't read part of it from the bench.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        10. 1 more reply
        1. New conversation
        2. Chris Geidner‏Verified account @chrisgeidner May 21
          Replying to @chrisgeidner @OrinKerr and

          In any event, neither of those are prepared by the justices, so they’re irrelevant to this discussion. I think reading a dissent matters b/c the justices have rare, formal outlets for sharing their views with the world. This is one.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        3. Orin Kerr‏Verified account @OrinKerr May 21
          Replying to @chrisgeidner @RichardMRe and

          I'm not sure they have only rare formal outlets for sharing their views with the world about the Court's cases, though, in that they get unlimited words to write anything they want, that anyone can then read. Shouldn't obviously matter if it's written or oral, at least to me.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        4. Chris Geidner‏Verified account @chrisgeidner May 21
          Replying to @OrinKerr @RichardMRe and

          Agreed, but that audio lasts. It exists. Just listened to RBG’s Ledbetter dissent in the documentary.

          0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
        5. End of conversation

      Loading seems to be taking a while.

      Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2018 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info