Clifton: I don't think allegations cut it at this stage.
-
-
This is his rebuttal time.
-
Friedland... really does not like Flentje.
-
Friedland: What if the order just said no Muslims, you're analogizing to cases where people were communists and agitating to overthrow govt
-
Flentje says that if the order said No Muslims, there wld be people with standing to challenge, and it would "raise First Amendment issues"
-
But won't say that it's illegal.
-
Flentje says you can't challenge based on "newspaper articles."
-
Clifton: Do you deny that these statements by then-candidate Trump were made?
-
Clifton: I understand that these statements shouldn't be given much weight, but if they were made, it is potential evidence.
-
Clifton: I just want to know what's on the table.
-
Friedland: Can you tell us anything about the type of evidence you'd present so we can decide if further proceedings are needed?
-
Flentje: Not yet, but [rolls on forward with something else entirely]
-
Clifton: Is there any legal authority as to the president or the council of the president can instruct departments on how to interpret order
-
Clifton throwing shade on how badly the EO is written and basically subtweeting Bannon
-
Sorry, I think he meant *counsel, not council
-
Flentje, "If there are no further questions, I encourage the court to stay the injunction or limit it"
-
The hearing is over. 9th Cir says they will issue a decision as soon as possible.
-
LMAO before the telephone cut off you could hear Friedland go, "Soooo"
-
Thanks everyone. If you enjoyed this and live in another jurisdiction, consider asking your circuit to follow the example of the 9th Cir
-
I know "enjoy" is a real weird term to use here but let's be real, I haven't "enjoyed" anything for weeks
- 2 réponses de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.