Chief justice, who will preside over Trump travel ban arguments tomorrow. attends state dinner at which most of the key players behind the ban will be presenthttps://twitter.com/yashar/status/988910030316539905 …
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
NEW: Argument over. Conservative justices indicate they will back Trump over the travel ban. Kennedy and Roberts both appear to have concerns about second-guessing the president on national security
UPDATE: U.S. Supreme Court leans toward upholding Trump's travel banhttps://reut.rs/2HqqWYj
Justice Alito among the conservatives leaning toward Trump: "If you look at what was done, it does not like at all like a Muslim ban."
It would be expected to have all 3 branches represented. What makes it unusual is the lack of invitations for representatives of the opposition, a vital part of US political integrity.
Then why make the implication in the first place?
It is, however, less than ethical to do so when the dinner or event is overwhelmingly attended by people who are part of the case he is nominally overseeing tomorrow. Further proof the Roberts court has little legitimacy.
Ohhhh, do you mean this Roberts? https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/7520 …pic.twitter.com/qh7GJ9qkzh
Nice of you to add this as an aside. 
You have 240 characters and you could easily have added this comment to you original tweet but hell not, let’s throw a little poison there. SMH
This is naive of me, but I’m hoping these pre-Trump justices still value the constitution.
So why make it sound like?
Thank you. As attorneys, we are trained to hold multiple thoughts at the same time, so the guilt by association thing really doesn't work for lawyers and judges.
What is unusual is that no democrats were invited - if ANY of the attendees at this state dinner had any integrity whatsoever or any care at all for the values enshrined in our Constitution, they would have boycotted this dinner on those grounds alone.
This second tweet could’ve fit in your FIRST ONE but we know how it works!
That was my next question. Thanks for clarifying. 
It’s still just weird.
Adds some “reality show” spice for reporting the proceedings. Especially, if there’s leaked comments from dinner.
Sure. Perfectly innoucuous. Nothing to see here.
Your first tweet suggests this is a problem.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.