16 Comments

It's Kafkaesque however you analyze it.

I've been operating under the assumption that if Republicans win the election, what's left of democracy, the rule of law, and certainly human and civil rights, are gone. In which case logical arguments won't make a difference to anything anymore.

So the case to consider is if Biden wins the election. Setting aside the violence that is certain to follow from Republican sympathizers, if we manage to move forward continuing under the current constitutional system, where are we headed?

Considering the sheer defiance coming from the federal judiciary, will that branch finish off what the Republicans couldn't in the election? Is judicial reform an imperative for the republic to survive? Meaning Democrats would have to win both houses of Congress in November too, such that legislation could be passed? (The Senate will be almost impossible to keep this year). Would SCOTUS accept any oversight of the judiciary at all, or will we have a constitutional crisis between the judiciary and the other two branches?

TL;DR - Exactly how many hoops do we have to jump through for anything to ever be okay in this country again? I'm trying to figure out, as a practical matter, where to look for light at the end of the tunnel. What do we need to do?

Expand full comment

You read my mind. We are in some deep shite indeed.

Expand full comment

President Biden seems to be acting as if addressing judicial corruption is equivalent to Trump’s assault on the rule of law.

Expand full comment

Damn this is good, Chris

And...the panel...lied. How can we read this any other way?. And why do I feel this is just going to make Burke even angrier and more vindictive?

Expand full comment

This is terrifying and even if Biden does win, what will be done. These fuckers are still fighting the Civil War. The ending of slavery really pissed the wealthy off and they are hell bent on bringing those days back without firing a shot. And they may just succeed because NOBODY IS STOPPING THEM😔

Expand full comment

This sounds a little like the court shenanigans in the period leading up to the French Revolution. There, as here, the courts seem to think that hubris and self dealing are acceptable. Things didn’t turn out as expected there. How will the story ending here be written? CFFG takes office and obliterates the judicial system? An adult in the room takes charge and sends the kids home? Curiouser and curiouser this is.

Expand full comment

This is amazing reporting. Thank you!

Expand full comment

Very well done, Chris. So many moving parts, so many weird players, so much bad faith: it's shenanigans, all right, and you've done very good work getting it in front of us.

Expand full comment

Chris,

Excellent analysis, the evidence you present from the record is compelling. Kafka, is indeed spiritually summoned by this process. We are in this together.

Expand full comment

I remain boggled by this. Does anyone know WHY Axon transferred the case after her prior case was before the jury? Couldn't she just have postponed the beginning of plaintiffs case a few days? You may have said this in your earlier posts, but it sounds like the "already to jury" bit is news since then? Did they object when their new filing got put before Burke?

This sounds a lot like "poor widdle me, lawyers don' just respec' me" similar to the pissed off judge in the Southwest Airlines case who ruled the lawyers had to undergo "religious liberty training" because they didn't use the EXACT words s/he wanted in their posting to employees on the subject of discrimination.

Expand full comment

To the extent the panel isn't acting "adversarial," that might be because it is acting inquisitorial

Expand full comment

I thought Clearance and Alito were horrible! They are; but Axon and Burke are just bald-faced lying as they piss on the “Rule of Law” in favor of calling it a rainstorm and ushering in the Law of Rule(rs.)

Expand full comment
author

Yes, indeed, mentioned it in a note (and in chat) earlier. Here’s the note: https://substack.com/@chrisgeidner/note/c-59097346

Expand full comment

"Hello, client, it is your lawyer. I called to inform you I dismissed your case because I was not sure why it was assigned to another judge. I hope this doesn't affect your claim at all. Anyway, call me if you need anything." - A lawyer not judge shopping.

Expand full comment

"accepting sone" should be "some"

Expand full comment