What republican are you going to have to twist in the wind to take up the cases? It's not going to help when a democrat looks them right in the eyes flinches and yells" boo!" Said republican will cry and go home. You're going to have to get an American no partisan. Lawyer to fight the demands on this while another just to fight the Republicans from leaking the plan to fighrlt the democrats or just snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
There's no doubt a shortage of courage on the right at the moment, especially among the PMC. Lord knows, I don't know many other mid-career lawyers willing to speak truth in the face of left's prevailing control of the legal institutions.
Excellent article and I very much agree with the thrust.
One quibble “ultra vires” is not a synonym for unlawful. It’s more specific than that: it means that an official is acting beyond or outside their granted powers. Theoretically that’s a valid argument (which for example could be applied to Judge Vargas), regardless of its merit in this case.
To get a preliminary injunction plaintiffs are required to show that they will suffer "irreparable harm." This, naturally, requires them to specify what that harm will be.
Seems like you thought this one through. Are all your arguments so coherent and persuasive?
What republican are you going to have to twist in the wind to take up the cases? It's not going to help when a democrat looks them right in the eyes flinches and yells" boo!" Said republican will cry and go home. You're going to have to get an American no partisan. Lawyer to fight the demands on this while another just to fight the Republicans from leaking the plan to fighrlt the democrats or just snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
There's no doubt a shortage of courage on the right at the moment, especially among the PMC. Lord knows, I don't know many other mid-career lawyers willing to speak truth in the face of left's prevailing control of the legal institutions.
The Left always assumes we will avoid fighting the way they do. Time to show them we’ll play hardball.
Excellent article and I very much agree with the thrust.
One quibble “ultra vires” is not a synonym for unlawful. It’s more specific than that: it means that an official is acting beyond or outside their granted powers. Theoretically that’s a valid argument (which for example could be applied to Judge Vargas), regardless of its merit in this case.
Good nuance. My point was more that this wasn't really a legal claim by the plaintiffs.
Absolutely right. It was kitchen sink word salad by activist incompetents.
Interesting POV.
You mentioned as a complaint that the plaintiffs did not say what harm would be caused by the stopping of payments.
That is the whole point.
They do not know what or who they are affecting with uninformed, misunderstood and illegal access and edit powers.
To get a preliminary injunction plaintiffs are required to show that they will suffer "irreparable harm." This, naturally, requires them to specify what that harm will be.