superrific
Master of the ZZLverse
- Messages
- 11,541
I have to admit, I'm persuaded by DOJ's argument on the Halligan issue. It's telling that its best legal brief, by far, has been defending Trump's meaningless corruption, but the fact is that no court has actually ruled that she's not the US Attorney, and if a court did, it would not be binding on other courts even within the district. So if the judge here told her not to caption it that way and she did, she could have a problem; but I'm not convinced that the judge is right here. It could be the judge is just trying to make life annoying for Halligan.
The party presentation bit is garbage and nonsense -- and rich coming from a department that routinely disregards it. But the underlying answer that the brief can be captioned as DOJ chooses seems, unfortunately, to be right. Not unfortunately because it makes a difference, but unfortunately just because I don't want to find my self in agreement with this DOJ about anything.

