Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This thread on the subject is a great place for you to post your thorough take. That's how forum threads work.
OK. I had mentioned:
Quote:
A federal appeals court panel on Thursday halted an outside review of thousands of documents seized from former president Donald Trump’s Florida residence, ruling that a lower court judge was wrong to appoint an expert to decide whether any of the material should be shielded from criminal investigators. Trump sought the outside arbiter, known as a special master, after the FBI executed a court-approved search of Mar-a-Lago, his home and private club, on Aug. 8, retrieving more than 13,000 documents related to Trump’s time in the White House. About 100 of the documents were classified, and some contained extremely sensitive government secrets, according to court records.
I noted the fact that the appellate panel was comprised of two Trump appointees and one appointed by Bush, since so many conservatives here consider any ruling against Trump to be a partisan slam.
It should also be noted that Cannon's order granting the appointment of a special master received a collective 'WTF?' among those in the legal community.
Folks who have a problem with the decision should probably read it before waxing at length with their umbrage:
I noted the fact that the appellate panel was comprised of two Trump appointees and one appointed by Bush, since so many conservatives here consider any ruling against Trump to be a partisan slam.
It should also be noted that Cannon's order granting the appointment of a special master received a collective 'WTF?' among those in the legal community.
Folks who have a problem with the decision should probably read it before waxing at length with their umbrage:
The decision really lays it out in no uncertain terms. Just imagine if every criminal search warrant received this treatment.
Quote:
All these arguments are a sideshow. The real question that guides our analysis is this—adequate remedy for what? The answer is the same as it was in Chapmam. “No weight can be assigned to this factor because [Plaintiff] did not assert that any rights had been violated, .e., that there has been a callous disregard for his constitutional rights or that a substantial interest in property is jeopardized.” 559 F.2d at 407. If there has been no constitutional violation—much less a serious one—then there is no harm to be remediated in the first place. This factor also weighs against exercising equitable jurisdiction.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
