I wonder if Judge Cannon can be sanctioned or even prosecuted for some of her actions during all of this. It's unclear to me (and undoubtedly many others) who oversees judicial conduct and how anything could be done without it becoming a partisan fight. Who decides when actions are inappropriate?
I clerked for an appellate judge at the beginning of my career. Frequently when a case would be discussed in chambers, the judge would ask who was the trial judge & offer an opinion as to that judge's legal abilities. In other words, reputation on the bench is as important as reputation for a practicing attorney. Judge Cannon's reputation will alway be stained by this behavior. Only Republicans can decide if her behavior regarding Trump precludes her from an appellate appointment in a future Republican Administration.
I am thinking that it is too much of a gray area to have her sanctioned or prosecuted, which is unfortunate. personally I would love to see it, but it opens the doors for people to start bringing charges against judges whose decisions they disagree with... I just hope that her career stops there. I worry that with another "trump-like" president, she may be rewarded for her actions and moved up!
It's not that we simply "don't like" or "disagree" with her ruling. It's that her rulings did not adhere to the Law. Surely judges need to be held to account when they just make shit up?
hope so... it seems that a lot of people (including judges) have gotten away with not adhering to the law. amazing considering that the Republicans proport to be the party of law and order. i guess it is true if it is "their law". it would appear that much of our government has gone along on some unspoken truths and agreements, and now we learn what happens when someone violates those unspoken truths. we also have examples of how hard it is to hold people accountable who do break the law. we are very fast to grab and jail someone who does some shoplifting, but seem paralyzed to go after these bigger crimes.
I think you are correct, sadly. The worst, of course, is someone like Justice Thomas... what a wrong title for him! Injustice seems more accurate. What a horrible man... what a dangerous SCOTUS we now have.
Judge Cannon obstructed Justice, is what I see. Like Judge Clarence Thomas should have recused himself, Judge Cannon should have done the same. Conflict of interest.
Is Cannon implicated in obstruction in this case because of her disregard of the law? You politely implied she is ignorant of procedures regarding lawfully seized items. I suspect she is fully aware that she is impeding a criminal investigation.
Dear Ms Vance, like many other lawyers, you analyzed the litigation assuming Trump-appointed Federalist Society judges will "apply the law," as opposed to "giving Trump what he asks for."
The widely held, sacrosanct American beliefs that "no person is above the law," is at issue. Now being tested is our country's core belief that we live under "the rule of law," [as opposed to the "whim of the KIng," or "the fiat of the fuhrer"].
Justice Clarence (Ginni's co-conspirator) Thomas should have rejected Trump's appeal out of hand, or recused himself. Having done neither, we see that SCOTUS is willing to ignore the rule of law. If the 5 Trump puppets on the Supreme Court give any credence to the appeal, (1) the world will know they are in Trump's pocket , (2) the Court's credibility will be forever lost, (3) our allies will be even more reluctant to share intelligence with the U.S.A., and (4) they will have established that Trump is free to ignore laws. At least we can rely on Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson to hold their feet to the fire and embarrass them for their perfidy.
Thank you, Joyce. I keep scratching my head and thinking these documents HAVE already been compromised and shared, and I’m left to wonder why this isn’t being treated more urgently.
Good evening/early morning JV. Things are unfolding fast and furious. Thanks for the update. As I follow your explanations I gain more and more respect for your analyses as things twist and turn around this saga of ill gotten gain and at what cost and to whom? I’m holding my breath for Friday.
Joyce, you make the legalize for us non-attorney types so easily understood. I can see how your law students would give you 5 star grades as a professor. Thank you for all you do.
cannon will never again be taken seriously. not after the 11 circuit handed her head back to her with what amounted to telling her, what planet are you on, get it together! OUCH. she cannot recover any credibility once she exposed an utter lack of intellectual honesty. IN THE TANK doesn't really adequately convey her total humiliation.
Unfortunately, considering she has a life time appointment, it doesn’t really matter if anyone takes her seriously. Clearly she doesn’t care as long as the proper agenda is followed.
I agree with dee, what about impeachment. Why was she given a life time appointment? I guess she feels as if she can do whatever she wants since she is there for the rest of her life. Sad. This must be changed.
Thank you so much, Ms. Vance, for clarifying the nitty gritty of the legal issues involved here. What I get out of your explanation is that Trump is doing everything he (actually his lawyers) can do to delay being indicted for criminality. If the Republicans win the House or both House and Senate, Trump hopes/expects the Republican controlled Congress will cancel the investigation and do whatever they can to absolve Trump of any wrong doing. Ouch. Has anyone else in American history gotten away with this much bull manure to fertilize the stinkweed of illiberalism?
Yes, unfortunately, so many Presidents kept unjust laws on the books when it came to kidnapping, forced labor, rape, hangings, when it came to Indigenous peoples and other people of color. Donald is just trying to go back to more of the same. Time for a real Democracy like we had under President Obama and we have now with President Biden. No going back.
Thank you for your insightful comment. Are "we the people" up to the civic responsibility of electring competent administrators, legislators and judges to remove unjust laws on the books and significantly revise ways in which our diverse population is regarded and spoken to? Are "we" capable of fairness, decency, cooperation, civil discourse? I believe this is the hard work for which "all of us are in this together."
whoa. this really is a narrow and obscure request by dumpty's lawyers. so much losing...
I started reading the glossary of terms and my eyes started crossing. I can only imagine how folks are following this whole episode as I can barely understand what would possess any litigator to make such arguments. Not the A team of federal practice bar, obviously.
Thank you, Joyce. I’m drawing diagrams of your legal terms (in boxes) connected by arrows flowing in the direction of legal movements. Your breakdown exposes Cannon for who she is. To say she’s incompetent or having slept through law lectures, I think, is too generous. Taken into the context of the moment, her rulings appear to collude (with great intention) with Trump’s obstructionism. I think we are all waiting for her come-up-pins, peer shunning, justified by the 11th Circuit ruling, or removal from the bench ... Clarence Thomas must find himself in a personal pickle. Thank you, Carol in Richmond, VA
Love it when your Discourse is in my inbox first thing in the morning. I sponge up the information that you have turned from legalese to english. Thanks.
Whew! And I am a lawyer! That said, thank you for the clear and concise procedural summary. Scooted me out of retirement for a moment there and reminded me why I loved practicing law.
I wonder if Judge Cannon can be sanctioned or even prosecuted for some of her actions during all of this. It's unclear to me (and undoubtedly many others) who oversees judicial conduct and how anything could be done without it becoming a partisan fight. Who decides when actions are inappropriate?
I clerked for an appellate judge at the beginning of my career. Frequently when a case would be discussed in chambers, the judge would ask who was the trial judge & offer an opinion as to that judge's legal abilities. In other words, reputation on the bench is as important as reputation for a practicing attorney. Judge Cannon's reputation will alway be stained by this behavior. Only Republicans can decide if her behavior regarding Trump precludes her from an appellate appointment in a future Republican Administration.
I am thinking that it is too much of a gray area to have her sanctioned or prosecuted, which is unfortunate. personally I would love to see it, but it opens the doors for people to start bringing charges against judges whose decisions they disagree with... I just hope that her career stops there. I worry that with another "trump-like" president, she may be rewarded for her actions and moved up!
It's not that we simply "don't like" or "disagree" with her ruling. It's that her rulings did not adhere to the Law. Surely judges need to be held to account when they just make shit up?
hope so... it seems that a lot of people (including judges) have gotten away with not adhering to the law. amazing considering that the Republicans proport to be the party of law and order. i guess it is true if it is "their law". it would appear that much of our government has gone along on some unspoken truths and agreements, and now we learn what happens when someone violates those unspoken truths. we also have examples of how hard it is to hold people accountable who do break the law. we are very fast to grab and jail someone who does some shoplifting, but seem paralyzed to go after these bigger crimes.
I think you are correct, sadly. The worst, of course, is someone like Justice Thomas... what a wrong title for him! Injustice seems more accurate. What a horrible man... what a dangerous SCOTUS we now have.
I have that same question: Who oversees judicial conduct? (and how about that scotus!!!!)
Judge Cannon obstructed Justice, is what I see. Like Judge Clarence Thomas should have recused himself, Judge Cannon should have done the same. Conflict of interest.
Is Cannon implicated in obstruction in this case because of her disregard of the law? You politely implied she is ignorant of procedures regarding lawfully seized items. I suspect she is fully aware that she is impeding a criminal investigation.
Thank you, Joyce, for keeping us informed.
Thanks once again for bringing clarity to take us out of the ver-mist.
Dear Ms Vance, like many other lawyers, you analyzed the litigation assuming Trump-appointed Federalist Society judges will "apply the law," as opposed to "giving Trump what he asks for."
The widely held, sacrosanct American beliefs that "no person is above the law," is at issue. Now being tested is our country's core belief that we live under "the rule of law," [as opposed to the "whim of the KIng," or "the fiat of the fuhrer"].
Justice Clarence (Ginni's co-conspirator) Thomas should have rejected Trump's appeal out of hand, or recused himself. Having done neither, we see that SCOTUS is willing to ignore the rule of law. If the 5 Trump puppets on the Supreme Court give any credence to the appeal, (1) the world will know they are in Trump's pocket , (2) the Court's credibility will be forever lost, (3) our allies will be even more reluctant to share intelligence with the U.S.A., and (4) they will have established that Trump is free to ignore laws. At least we can rely on Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson to hold their feet to the fire and embarrass them for their perfidy.
Very well spoken.
Thank you, Joyce. I keep scratching my head and thinking these documents HAVE already been compromised and shared, and I’m left to wonder why this isn’t being treated more urgently.
Thank you for clarifying what is going on with this appeal.
Good evening/early morning JV. Things are unfolding fast and furious. Thanks for the update. As I follow your explanations I gain more and more respect for your analyses as things twist and turn around this saga of ill gotten gain and at what cost and to whom? I’m holding my breath for Friday.
vermischt, und verkokt!
Verhoodelt, in PennDutch.
Joyce, you make the legalize for us non-attorney types so easily understood. I can see how your law students would give you 5 star grades as a professor. Thank you for all you do.
Hey , I practiced employer-side labor and employment law for over 25 years and I learn about he law every time I read JWV’s posts!
nice of you to admit that. Kudos.
I suspect Cannon is fully aware that she thinks she is protecting FPOTUS for whatever reason but exposing her ineptitude in this risky process.
cannon will never again be taken seriously. not after the 11 circuit handed her head back to her with what amounted to telling her, what planet are you on, get it together! OUCH. she cannot recover any credibility once she exposed an utter lack of intellectual honesty. IN THE TANK doesn't really adequately convey her total humiliation.
Unfortunately, considering she has a life time appointment, it doesn’t really matter if anyone takes her seriously. Clearly she doesn’t care as long as the proper agenda is followed.
impeachment.
I agree with dee, what about impeachment. Why was she given a life time appointment? I guess she feels as if she can do whatever she wants since she is there for the rest of her life. Sad. This must be changed.
Thank you so much, Ms. Vance, for clarifying the nitty gritty of the legal issues involved here. What I get out of your explanation is that Trump is doing everything he (actually his lawyers) can do to delay being indicted for criminality. If the Republicans win the House or both House and Senate, Trump hopes/expects the Republican controlled Congress will cancel the investigation and do whatever they can to absolve Trump of any wrong doing. Ouch. Has anyone else in American history gotten away with this much bull manure to fertilize the stinkweed of illiberalism?
Yes, unfortunately, so many Presidents kept unjust laws on the books when it came to kidnapping, forced labor, rape, hangings, when it came to Indigenous peoples and other people of color. Donald is just trying to go back to more of the same. Time for a real Democracy like we had under President Obama and we have now with President Biden. No going back.
Thank you for your insightful comment. Are "we the people" up to the civic responsibility of electring competent administrators, legislators and judges to remove unjust laws on the books and significantly revise ways in which our diverse population is regarded and spoken to? Are "we" capable of fairness, decency, cooperation, civil discourse? I believe this is the hard work for which "all of us are in this together."
Absolutely!!! 100%
whoa. this really is a narrow and obscure request by dumpty's lawyers. so much losing...
I started reading the glossary of terms and my eyes started crossing. I can only imagine how folks are following this whole episode as I can barely understand what would possess any litigator to make such arguments. Not the A team of federal practice bar, obviously.
Thank you, Joyce. I’m drawing diagrams of your legal terms (in boxes) connected by arrows flowing in the direction of legal movements. Your breakdown exposes Cannon for who she is. To say she’s incompetent or having slept through law lectures, I think, is too generous. Taken into the context of the moment, her rulings appear to collude (with great intention) with Trump’s obstructionism. I think we are all waiting for her come-up-pins, peer shunning, justified by the 11th Circuit ruling, or removal from the bench ... Clarence Thomas must find himself in a personal pickle. Thank you, Carol in Richmond, VA
Loved the sarcasm of snoozing through classes. We all knew what was truly implied, I think.
Love it when your Discourse is in my inbox first thing in the morning. I sponge up the information that you have turned from legalese to english. Thanks.
Whew! And I am a lawyer! That said, thank you for the clear and concise procedural summary. Scooted me out of retirement for a moment there and reminded me why I loved practicing law.