Since when can you petition for rehearing of an opinion issued more than a year ago?
Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 40 requires a petition for rehearing be filed within 14 days of the date judgment is entered, extended to 45 days if the United Stares, a US agency, or a US government employee in an official capacity is one of the parties. Rule 35 applies the same time limits on petitions for rehearing en banc.
ETA: it looks like the May 2018 ruling referenced was the original district court judgment, and the Second Circuit panel issued their opinion in opinion in July 2019. Now we just wait for the court to deny the apparently timely but baseless petition for rehearing en banc.
The contrast between the “guy whose wife and Mueller’s wife are best friends” and the man who is the most corrupt person in the government besides MOM and Trump is breathtaking.
You mean the DOJ is actually taking up valuable court time asking them to reconsider an obviously correct ruling concerning Trump trying to block people on Twitter.
That’s what I came up with, too. Seems odd to put it at the very bottom, but they opted to put the stupid dis-co-bot thing at the top and it appeared to me that a ‘reply’ there would be to that and not end up where you want or expect the comments to be.
Well they are the President’s personal consigliere law firm after all… wait… I’m just hearing this… apparently, that is not, in fact, the case. Huh, maybe someone should tell Barr…
Sure. But the presidency is generally understood to perform acts with sincere intent to be for the good of the nation and not for bringing the downfall of the government which it heads. This one makes me question the actual origin of the word “ruination”.
Agreed.
Clearly, if its a private account, resolving its status in court is a private matter and must be conducted by private attorneys. Skipping the fact that employing the DOJ to such ends is an abuse of power, he should be paying all costs associated with this litigation, win or lose.
Agent Orange wants to have his cake and eat it, too. That doesn’t mean we have to pay for the cake.
I don’t understand how DoJ even has standing in this particular case. In what way are they advocating for the people of the United States? (Hint: No way.) I would hope SCOTUS just refuses to hear it.
If you scroll to the very bottom of the comment thread, you can hit the reply button there and it will make a first level comment. Hope that helps. This is one of the most confusing commenting applications I’ve ever used.
And, by the way, your Honor, Mr. Trump is harassing federal officials to make an official government rate change that will garner him millions of dollars on loans he has to repay.
