@normative Again, FreedomWorks' challenge IS public. Does absence of VZ in docket mean no challenge? @attackerman @KenGude @bmaz @joshrogin
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel@attackerman@KenGude@bmaz@joshrogin FreedomWorks isn't bound by a gag order1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @normative
@normative But it was FISC that made it public. FW specifically did NOT publicize this, even w/in FW@attackerman@KenGude@bmaz@joshrogin1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel@attackerman@KenGude@bmaz@joshrogin My guess? VZ will wait for an actual order to issue for any challenge.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @normative
@normative You don't think they've received an order? I do.@attackerman@KenGude@bmaz@joshrogin2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel@attackerman@KenGude@bmaz@joshrogin Application filed a week ago, FISC may have taken its time responding to 2nd C.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @normative
@normative@emptywheel I thought FISC gave FW & administration till 6/12 for motions/responses?@KenGude@bmaz@joshrogin2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @attackerman
@attackerman Yes. But they didn't say they wouldn't authorize dragnet in interim, did they?@normative@KenGude@bmaz@joshrogin2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel@attackerman@normative didn’t say they wouldn’t? Presumably any order requiring production would have been published too2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AlanInDC
@emptywheel@attackerman@normative also statutory argument is not intuitive anymore given that “current” statutory text is pre-PATRIOT3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@AlanInDC Oh, in theory I agree with you. But in practice I think FISC will authorize. @attackerman @normative
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.