Twenty-four states tell Judge Cannon that they want to file an amicus brief opposing the special counsel's request to modify Trump's conditions of release to stop him from inciting threats against law enforcement. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
Hey, here's a nice surprise: Judge Cannon has DENIED the motion of the 24 states to file an amicus brief in favor of Donald Trump's right to endanger law enforcement
If you already have enough delays built into the trial to go past the election, probably don't want to deal with 24 states adding to your workload unnecessarily.
Lemme guess, these are ALSO the same states which have tried to ban filming cops and/or tried to have cops declared a "protected class" so that people can be charged with hate crimes for being mean to them?
Red states have been picking up the pace lately, but that’s a bipartisan thing — look at the list of states with all-party consent laws, which still live on even though the reason they were enacted (recording police) has been repeatedly ruled unconstitutional.
I don’t think the states forming a majority should matter much. If the brief were by the FBI and said “it’s totally fine to threaten us” that could have some relevance. In a normal case a bunch of political allies of the defendant shouldn’t influence the decision. Of course this isn’t a normal judge
Curious to see what the "harms identified in the brief" are, but it's taking uncharacteristically long for any Recapper to debase themselves and pay $2.70 for it.
I paid a dime to get the full docket text, and I see that Florida SG Henry Whitaker, where he was supposed to list the states or just put "24 states" instead identified the filing amici as himself and Trump. So clearly the quality here is going to be stupendous.
I keep reading this then thinking, then reading it again and thinking, and I'm not sure it's gonna help me feel any more sane but I'm just gonna keep reading it
And thinking
I may even draw some logical conclusions about it