Andrew Sidley-MacKie

Notable that this doesn’t include any declarations from Halligan or anyone else, and attempts to rely solely on the foreperson’s statement.

Yeah, I thought most states already give their Supreme Courts discretion about whether to accept certified questions…

I know the court reporter takes a transcript of testimony and the grand jury’s colloquies with the prosecutor. I don’t believe they transcribe the actual deliberations and vote though. But I may be wrong about that.

To be fair, I think that’s always true? I don’t think that grand jury deliberations are recorded or transcribed. And typically only the foreperson signs the indictment to attest to the vote.

I don’t get how this doesn’t violate ethics rules. It says the non-lawyers are going to only own a stake in the separate “administrative services” entity. But then it says they’re going to share in the law firm’s revenue. Seems like a contradiction…

Resign.

Republican 2025 platform: kids only need one doll and zero food.

I have really good memories of my dad reading the Redwall books to my brother and I. Also Tolkien.

What document is this from? Please include links to legal documents when posting excerpts.

…not clear to me why that wouldn’t likewise be a trespass and therefore a search.

The same logic should apply where a dog touches the car even if it doesn’t go “inside,” right? After all, Jones said it was a trespass to attach a GPS tracker to the outside (undercarriage) of a car. If the dog, e.g. puts its paws up on the door to sniff higher, or alerts by scratching the car…

I’m really starting to suspect that most of the tech bros haven’t actually read Tolkien, as they certainly don’t understand it.

The gentle hobbits save the “hard men” of Gondor, largely through compassion and selflessness. Not the other way around. The Christian parable is barely hidden!

I’m not sure that the litigation hold requires them to keep a record of purely oral communications, whereas a lot likely would have.

Nazis: “Arbeit macht frei.”

Utah: “Work-conditioned housing.”

In Utah, Trump’s Vision for Homelessness Begins to Take Shape

Utah: We are creating literal concentration camps for the homeless.

NYTimes: We’ve gotta fairly report on both sides of this valid debate.

www.nytimes.com/2025/10/29/u...

I would go further and say that a completely unprompted “costumes optional” means that costumes are encouraged…

still absolutely wild that only one of these schools has rejected this open extortion out of hand, would be difficult to devise a more obvious test of whether you’re baseline competent to run a university or not

We can’t write an opinion because that would mean we are committed to certain reasoning, but also everyone knows the real reasons we’re issuing these unreasoned decisions and district courts act illegitimately when they don’t follow those secret reasons in different cases.

Is there a more Lucy with the football claim in American politics than “Democrats need to move to the center to win elections and then they can adopt progressive policies”?

The assault is horrifying on its own, but then there's the other agent shouting "...or else you're next" while another fixes their face shroud.

Unfortunately, Macs aren’t an option for my practice! (Far too much video discovery comes in proprietary formats with players that only run on Windows.)

Do you know if there’s been any organized effort by the CJA panel attorneys to move for dismissal of cases if they’re not being paid? Seems like a great opportunity.

Ok, but genuinely I have no idea how I could practice law without Adobe Pro. What are the alternatives?

This was a classic Scalia move. In exclusionary rule cases, he would talk about all the wonderful civil remedies available. In the civil remedy cases, he would create as many procedural and substantive obstacles as possible to ensure plaintiffs couldn't win.

The shadow docket orders don't even tell District Court judges what to do going forward *in that case*.

If Judge Frimpong gets another request for an injunction on DHS, she should just rule the same way again. It's not like SCOTUS has told her otherwise, this is the entirety of their order.

SCOTUS: considering race as one factor in a college applicant's file is blatantly unconstitutional

ALSO SCOTUS: considering race as one factor in targeting whom to detain and deport is cool cool cool

I’m not familiar with the specific statutes governing IJs. But I will say I’m surprised that ALJs of any kind count as inferior officers and don’t require Senate confirmation.

Any speculation about why custody of all of them couldn’t be transferred at the same time? Why so piecemeal?

If any of you are getting pro bono hours doing work for the commerce Department, you should die of embarrassment and shame