@emptywheel @attackerman @KenGude @bmaz @joshrogin My guess? VZ will wait for an actual order to issue for any challenge.
-
-
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 -
Replying to @AlanInDC
@AlanInDC@emptywheel@attackerman I think everyone’s basically agreeing to treat USAF as retroextending sunset & then amending that text.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @normative
@normative@emptywheel@attackerman yeah but I don't think that's correct based on the plain language http://justsecurity.org/23553/usa-freedom-technical-corrections-act/ …3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AlanInDC
@AlanInDC@emptywheel@attackerman (Viz: Sunset extension means amendments apply to pre-sunset text.)2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@normative Oh, I know that's what DOJ thinks. The question is how good an argument others can present. @AlanInDC @attackerman
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.