Sabitlenmiş Tweet
District court judges when you tell them the INA strips them of jurisdiction over asylum claims:
English
Joe Bingham
89.3K posts
Joe Bingham
@teafortillerman
Civil rights attorney. Bad tweets are ironic.
United States Katılım Temmuz 2008
5K Takip Edilen2.6K Takipçiler
it's worth noting that despite war supporters' robotic repetition of the "they killed 30,000 of their own people" talking point, the theocracy that did that is still in charge in Iran and we seemingly have no plan to overthrow them
English
Cornell rejects anti-Technion BDS resolution.
And tells @ZohranKMamdani not even to think about ending the Consortium:
“It is no more possible for Cornell to unilaterally terminate…than it would be for…the City of New York to do the same.”
assembly.cornell.edu/resolutions/st…
English
Joe Bingham retweetledi
You are a liar.
You explictly pledged not to gerrymander Virginia right before the last election.
Once you got into power, it was the first thing you did.
Abigail Spanberger@SpanbergerForVA
Early voting is ongoing in Virginia’s redistricting referendum! Virginians have the opportunity to respond to the actions of other states and a President who says he’s “entitled” to more GOP seats in Congress. 🗳️ As a Virginia voter, I’m voting YES. Vote by April 21.
English
Joe Bingham retweetledi
Over the past several weeks, Carrie Prejean Boller has complained that she was removed from the Presidential Commission on Religious Liberty because of her Catholic beliefs, and she has called out myself and other Catholic members of the commission for not defending her. This is absurd. Mrs. Prejean Boller was not dismissed for her religious convictions but rather for her behavior at a gathering of the Commission last month: browbeating witnesses, aggressively asserting her point of view, hijacking the meeting for her own political purposes. The Catholic position on matters of “Zionism,” to which I fully subscribe, is as follows: all forms of antisemitism are to be unequivocally condemned; the state of Israel has a right to exist; but the modern nation of Israel does not represent the fulfillment of Biblical prophecies and hence does not stand beyond criticism. If Mrs. Prejean Boller were dismissed for holding these beliefs, it is difficult to understand why I am still a member of the Commission. To paint herself as a victim of anti-Catholic prejudice or to claim that her religious liberty has been denied is simply preposterous.
Carrie Prejean Boller@CarriePrejean1
Your Excellency, you shared with me through text message to me that my position reflects Catholic teaching, especially that the modern state of Israel is not the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. That is the position I expressed, and yet I was removed from the Religious Liberty Commission. Respectfully, it is difficult not to conclude that this commission does not truly care about religious liberty when a Catholic can be removed for faithfully articulating the Church’s teaching. Asking me to deny Catholic teaching in order to satisfy a political ideology is itself a violation of my religious freedom. As Pope Leo XIII warned, “To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamor is raised against truth, is the part of a coward.” Whether I serve on this Commission or not, my voice will only grow louder for those being persecuted for their faith. I believe this appointment was ordained by God, and I will not abandon my Catholic faith to keep a position on a commission that has abandoned its mission. If my religious freedom is not protected, then no one’s is. Please speak up. Please stand up for Catholics. Be brave, Bishop Barron. The world needs brave men.
English
Joe Bingham retweetledi
Joe Bingham retweetledi
Joe Bingham retweetledi
The fact that the state attorney did this (and not some rando sleazeball defense attorney) is infuriating
That they did this in order to deny a new trial to a woman who was (it seems) the victim of a vindictive prosecutor and a corrupt court is rage-inducing
Anna Bower@AnnaBower
An absolutely excruciating moment at the Georgia Supreme Court this week. Justice Peterson pressed state attorney Deborah Leslie over her citations to cases that apparently don’t exist.
English
@tedfrank I got it wrong, because it was a coin flip on honor code. I don't mind that it takes me 1-2 seconds to think through it. I'm slow.
English
A majority got this wrong, and it’s a self-selected sample of above-average intelligence. It’s demoralizing. I’ll ask the same question in the next tweet, wondering how my readers will do.
RandomSprint🧭@RandomSprint
Stop. Riddle checkpoint. Read and answer quickly. There are three people. A, B, and C. A is married. C is unmarried. A is looking at B. B is looking at C. Is a married person looking at an unmarried person?
English
If instead we eliminated federal spending on all those things, would we be able to set their nuclear program back another decade?
Because I'm open to a conversation.
James Fishback@j_fishback
Would you rather spend $200 billion to bomb Iran or…? A: give every teacher in America a $62,500 bonus B: provide downpayment assistance for 20 million young families C: build 1,300 rural hospitals
English
Joe Bingham retweetledi
Joe Bingham retweetledi
Did I just walk through a time portal
PROTECT ALL WILDLIFE@Protect_Wldlife
Unbelievable 😠! Lawyers for New Hampshire woman argue that 'animal crush' videos are 'repulsive and shocking' - but are protected under the First Amendment.!?! Attorneys for a Manchester woman accused of distributing “animal crush” videos of baby and adult monkeys being purposely tortured, mutilated and sexually abused are asking a judge to dismiss the indictment against her, arguing that while such videos are “repulsive and shocking,” they are protected under the First Amendment. “Repulsiveness and shock are not sufficient to permit restrictions on speech,” reads a motion to dismiss filed in U.S. District Court in Concord by attorneys for Lynn Seymour, 51, who was indicted in September on one count of distribution of animal crush videos and one count of conspiracy. Seymour appeared in U.S. District Court in Concord, represented by her court-appointed counsel Behzad Mirhashem. Seymour is alleged to have participated in, and served as an administrator for, private online groups that included hundreds of members who allegedly exchanged and distributed animal crush videos depicting the torture, killing, sexually sadistic mutilation and sexual abuse of animals, specifically baby and adult monkeys. Full Story: unionleader.com/news/animals/l…
English
@DerekPederson3 Did I just walk through a time portal? This supreme court case was like 15 years ago.
English
This is outrageous.
How is animal torture porn protected under the First Amendment?
PROTECT ALL WILDLIFE@Protect_Wldlife
Unbelievable 😠! Lawyers for New Hampshire woman argue that 'animal crush' videos are 'repulsive and shocking' - but are protected under the First Amendment.!?! Attorneys for a Manchester woman accused of distributing “animal crush” videos of baby and adult monkeys being purposely tortured, mutilated and sexually abused are asking a judge to dismiss the indictment against her, arguing that while such videos are “repulsive and shocking,” they are protected under the First Amendment. “Repulsiveness and shock are not sufficient to permit restrictions on speech,” reads a motion to dismiss filed in U.S. District Court in Concord by attorneys for Lynn Seymour, 51, who was indicted in September on one count of distribution of animal crush videos and one count of conspiracy. Seymour appeared in U.S. District Court in Concord, represented by her court-appointed counsel Behzad Mirhashem. Seymour is alleged to have participated in, and served as an administrator for, private online groups that included hundreds of members who allegedly exchanged and distributed animal crush videos depicting the torture, killing, sexually sadistic mutilation and sexual abuse of animals, specifically baby and adult monkeys. Full Story: unionleader.com/news/animals/l…
English
@mrkellywright @shipwreckedcrew Generally not, unless it successfully sues which is unlikely. That's the major reason paying out the money is considered "irreparable" harm by faithful judges, which makes such injunction hard to get (...from faithful judges).
English
@shipwreckedcrew Hey, here is a question for the pros. I am confused when a district court orders that money must be paid (like the PP “Defunding” case) what happens when it is overturned? Does the government get its money back?
English
District Court orders blocking the ending of TPS living on borrowed time. Prior DOJ filings and SCOTUS accepting specific question raised by DOJ makes the outcome almost pre-ordained.
Link in next panel down.
RPs appreciated.
English
Ship is right that this is how the cases should turn out, but I'm far less confident than he is that that's how they will turn out.
Shipwreckedcrew@shipwreckedcrew
District Court orders blocking the ending of TPS living on borrowed time. Prior DOJ filings and SCOTUS accepting specific question raised by DOJ makes the outcome almost pre-ordained. Link in next panel down. RPs appreciated.
English
@dnieporent @OrinKerr Justice Thomas's concurrence/referenced concurrences explain this quite well. (As with QI, the aggressive pace at which the Court redrafted other provisions required it to redraft 1983.)
English
@OrinKerr I think the policy reasons for (the narrower version of) Heck have some force, but I cannot figure out how the original decision flows from the text of § 1983 rather than from those policy reasons.
English
I think the Heck v. Humphrey bar is pretty much absurd, from the first line to the last, so I'm pleased to see it narrowed somewhat today in Olivier v. City of Brandon.
supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf…
English
Old man sitting next to me on the train doomscrolling, not spending more than a second on any video. First video to get the full watch: Top 5 TV Shows on Netflix with the Most Nudity. 😂
English
YouTube
English
@MaxPaxCat @Big_Kirbs @CountDankulaTV @grok Idk man. I was homeschooled and didn't smell pot till law school, and I still knew the song...
English
The Afroman Trial.
-Cops raid Afromans house for bullshit reasons.
-Steal money, break his door, fuck his house up.
-No criminality found whatsoever, no charges at all pressed on Afroman.
-Afroman spends the next 3 years making songs that make fun of all the officers involved by name, even using footage of the raid from his own CCTV cameras.
-Songs had titles like "Randy Walters is a son of a bitch" and "Lick Em Low Lisa" accusing one of the officers of being a lesbian and sleeping with the other officers wives.
-During the raid one officer looked like he was about to eat some lemon pound cake sitting on Afromans counter, Afroman made a whole album calling the officer fat.
-The cops get mad and file a lawsuit for defamation.
-Afroman turns up to court in a whole American flag suit.
-Officers performatively mald and cry while listening to the songs really trying to oversell how badly the songs upset them.
-One officer was suing because Afroman made a whole song about him saying he was fucking the officers wife. When the officer was asked if Afroman was really fucking his wife, he said "I don't know". Nuking his own case and establishing that there is a non-zero chance that Afroman might actually be fucking his wife.
-As his only witness for the trial, Afroman brought a deputies EX FUCKING WIFE.
-The jury ruled completely in favour of Afroman.
This entire thing has been a great win for free speech and absolutely fucking hilarious.
English