Sean Marotta

Let he who has not thought this cast the first stone.

Goodness! I am so glad you are okay.

2026 Fellowship Program | Join Our Civil Rights & Commercial Litigation Fellowship - Apply Today — Ali & Lockwood LLP Apply for the 2026 Fellowship at Ali & Lockwood LLP, a civil rights-focused law firm in Washington, D.C. Join a dynamic team handling complex litigation and systemic reform cases.

📣 We're hiring again! This time for a 1-year fellowship starting Fall 2026. Please share with your networks! www.alilockwood.com/2026-fellows...

Law professors: New clickwrap hypothetical just dropped.

The White House got very fussy when people would call it OBBBA or OB3. No, it had to be the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act."

(Even though that short title was stripped out of the final law, so it's technically An Act to Provide for Reconciliation Pursuant to Title II of H. Con. Res. 14.)

It's the meta meta stress that really does you in.

Cannot wait for the case on Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee to hit the Emergency Docket this year.

#EvergreenPost

Sending warmth, friend.

Ashamed to admit that I laughed.

"Mr. Chief Justice and may it please the Court: I move the admission of AB of the Bar of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura. I am satisfied that she posesses the necessary qualifications."

They need to sit in the back because of the big hats, tho.

They're going to have to add a rule on this to the 23d edition of the Bluebook.

A section of the Table of Authority that most briefs don't have!

META: We know everything about you and have highly sophisticated content and ad-serving algorithims.

ALSO META: You want to post a picture to your Story from your DESKTOP? Woah, woah, woah. We're not the space program here.

The underlying argument about the bond issue. Not the court-order thing, obviously.

Steve's the guy who walks into the ER and says it's been a quiet night.

Delaware is just a legal fiction that exists in a CT Corporation P.O. Box.

Other than the obvious joke, is it legally frivolous if the Fifth Circuit has endorsed the argument?

District court precedent not beng binding is hard, though. I don't know I yet have the doctrinal answer for what is driving the judge's anger. The system relies on a good-faith executive that we don't have.

This is great advice. But I am suing over fonts.

Not sure I understand Isihara's standing to appeal because the district court ruled that Isihara purged his contempt before any payments were due.

I agree that she did. But the initial clip was very out-of-context until I dug in.

(To draw out the difference, assume someone else wrote the brief the question is directed at, this attorney is parachuting in for the argument, and this is the first question posed.)

Answering "yes," when the judge says "is that your position?" is not by itself sanctionable. It becomes sanctionable to the extent the lawyer advocated that position.

30 Rock.

And the judge put a hypothetical to the DOJ attorney to test the position, and she grasped the nettle and admitted that no right to challenge means no right to challenge.

Is that insane? I don't know. A lot of immigration law is counterintuitive, to say the least.

So I don't know a ton about immigration law. But I tried reading the colloquy in context, and it appears the DOJ attorney is arguing that an immigrant with an order of removal allowing third-country removal doesn't have a due-process right to challenge the particular country he is deported to.

I was pleased to write for my pal @meganeboyd.bsky.social an essay on How I Write for Scribes. And if you'd like to read it, it's here. I don't think I have any special sauce, but this is how I do it.

www.scribes.org/wp-content/u...

Can't swap wood for sheep because the NBA trade deadline closed on 2/5.