Doing legal things @xAI @X. Board of Directors @presidiosf. Former @WhiteHouse @TheJusticeDept and @DOGE.
Washington, DC
- Tweets 1,399
- Following 221
- Followers 14,776
- Likes 381
Pinned Tweet
Ad Astra, friends.
SpaceX has acquired xAI, forming one of the most ambitious, vertically integrated innovation engines on (and off) Earth → spacex.com/updates#xai-joins…
16
17
293
30,192
Big Balls was our youngest engineer @DOGE, is a genuine genius, and now has demonstrated extraordinary bravery in the face of violent crime. What a patriot.
518
7,498
55,421
1,303,629
The D.C. Circuit released a significant opinion today in one of the earliest major @DOGE cases--the litigation over the reduction of USAID. It's another big legal win for @realDonaldTrump and @DOGE. It also has broader implications, as I'll explain. 1/
143
3,539
17,455
1,277,065
BREAKING: @AGPamBondi and SG John Sauer have filed an emergency application in the Supreme Court regarding their huge win in the USAID impoundment case, which we discussed previously. This is a big deal, as I'll explain. 1/
102
2,388
8,761
521,402
The district judges in New Jersey are thinking about replacing @realdonaldtrump’s chosen US Attorney—@USAttyHabba—with someone the judges choose under a statute purporting to give them that power. But if the judges attempt that move, it should fail. Here’s why. 1/
Scoop: President Donald Trump has full confidence in Alina Habba, the Deputy U.S. Attorney General has told New Jersey U.S. District Court Chief Judge Renee Bumb. The call from DOJ to the judge came in advance of a judicial meeting on Monday AM.
newjerseyglobe.com/judiciary…
85
1,730
5,620
443,237
Lets talk (again) about two tiers of justice. On Friday a judge enjoined the @FTC from investigating Media Matters, finding the investigation likely violates the First Amendment. This isn't just immunity from prosecution; it's immunity from *investigation.* Unpacked below. 1/
137
1,175
3,395
368,062
On the heels of DC attempting to disbar @JeffClarkUS, a dark money group has escalated further--filing bar complaints against little-known lawyers who defend the Administration in court. This is a frontal assault on the Executive Branch. It must be defeated at all costs. 1/
87
1,341
3,186
252,859
Some lower court judges seems determined to burn down the village in order to save it, seemingly oblivious that destroying vertical stare decisis will destroy the judiciary generally. Lets review the latest missive in lower court judges' war on the Supreme Court. 1/
🚨EXCLUSIVE:
Federal judges tell NBC News the Supreme Court has got to do a better job of explaining emergency rulings, with frequent decisions in favor of Trump at least appearing to validate harsh criticism of the judiciary at a time of rising threats:
86
725
2,875
299,994
Another emergency filing in the Supreme Court last night by @TheJusticeDept, this time because a district court has commandeered immigration enforcement in Los Angeles. There are multiple serious issues here, and emergency relief seems proper. 1/
29
662
2,545
87,867
Another win for @TheJusticeDept before the Supreme Court--this time on whether district courts can enjoin the termination of grants that conflict with the Administration's anti-DEI policies. Lots of interesting opinions, worth a brief discussion. 1/
BREAKING: #SCOTUS, 5-4, allows admin to proceed with termination of NIH grants under Trump DEI/gender policies. But also 5-4 vote to leave in place ruling voiding the NIH memos enforcing the Trump policies. Roberts w/libs. Barrett swings. Doc: documentcloud.org/documents/…
23
350
2,240
214,014
All eyes on the Southern District of Florida and its newly confirmed US Attorney Jason Reding Quinones. Given various setbacks in DC during Trump 45, the extraordinarily lopsided beltway jury pool, and the factual connection to Palm Beach--SD Fla is a logical place for DOJ to pursue this incredibly high stakes grand jury investigation. And whatever comes from it ....
Fox News reporting that AG Pam Bondi today signed a one-page order directing an unnamed federal prosecutor to bring Russiagate conspiracy evidence to a grand jury. This is in response to criminal referrals sent last month to DOJ by DNI Tulsi Gabbard.
31
358
1,685
107,950
I worked closely with @JeffClarkUS in both Trump Administrations. This is an outrageous weaponization of the bar ethics process--one that could be turned against any lawyer serving in government at any time. All steps must be taken to push back.
BREAKING: The D.C. Bar's board of professional responsibility recommends that @JeffClarkUS be *disbarred* s3.documentcloud.org/documen…
76
468
1,622
194,435
This is an important and creative suit by @USDOJ asserting @realdonaldtrump's constitutional authority over the Executive Branch. Here's why. 1/
JUST IN: The Trump administration is going on offense against three members of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting who have not left their posts despite Trump's attempt to fire them.
The lawsuit seeks a court order to oust them.
storage.courtlistener.com/re…
33
306
1,358
227,297
Another important stay filing this evening by @AGPamBondi and SG John Sauer. This application is the next in an unfortunately growing line of @TheJusticeDept efforts to force lower courts to follow the Supreme Courts decisions. 1/
17
330
1,243
84,044
This win is important on its own, but has broader implications. The upshot is that private parties who want Government $$ cannot sue over impoundment. That *seriously* reduces litigation risk to impoundment. No flood of suits = no flood of injunctions. 11/
4
135
1,227
56,912
Finally, congratulations to @AGPamBondi @DAGToddBlanche Stanley Woodward @BrettShumate and the @TheJusticeDept team on another big win.
Here is the opinion: media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opin…
/end
28
155
1,218
29,924
So once again, the Supreme Court is called to the field. This is a vitally important issue. Let us hope the justices act swiftly. /end
6
132
1,193
22,012
To recap, there were two major challenges to the winddown of USAID--one regarding terminated employees, the other regarding terminated grants and contracts. Both have now resolved largely in the Administration's favor. 2/
2
123
1,180
56,227
Well that order is gone, at least for now. The D.C. Circuit reversed Judge Ali today, holding that the plaintiffs do not have a cause of action to litigate impoundment. Here's the key para. 10/
7
147
1,120
113,266
It is now effectively over. The district court ordered that USAID make payments for all work previously performed but did *not* interfere with prospective terminations of contracts and grants. Largely a win for the Administration, but it had a catch. 5/
3
111
1,092
53,299
Have now had a chance to review @TheJusticeDept's emergency filing in this important case at the crossroads of USAID, wasteful foreign spending, and the vital issue of impoundment. The filing is very well done and @TheJusticeDept should win, as we will see. 1/
As expected, @TheJusticeDept has sought emergency relief from the Supreme Court in this case about USAID and impoundment. I will try to break down the request later today if I have time, but in the meantime the link is below.
23
248
1,051
122,595
The Administration won the employee case in the district court before Judge Nichols, a Trump Appointee from 45. (Judge Nichols entered a TRO but ultimately denied a PI, which effectively ended the case.) The terminations took effect and that case has been out of the news. 3/
1
101
1,042
55,518
The other major challenge was to the Administration's termination of billions of dollars in USAID grants and contracts. This case is more complex. It included a trip to the Supreme Court--one of the first in the Administration--threats of contempt, the works. 4/
1
94
952
55,106
But there is one thing that Act does *not* do--authorize NGOs, private charities, aggrieved states, or other private plaintiffs to sue about impoundment. And without a cause of action to sue, you cannot sue. 8/
6
125
945
29,354
So where is the mandate? Who knows! It could be caught in en banc proceedings, the DC Circuit could be following its normal (slow) process, or something else. But for the Government, this doesn't work. It has a September 30 deadline to make decisions. 4/
1
95
906
42,047
Yet here, "a single district court supplanted that process." One district judge has commandeered the entire USAID appropriation and enjoined the Executive Branch to spend every penny--all without Congress authorizing the underlying suit in the first place. 9/
3
141
907
26,951
First a point of privilege. Having lived this case in the early days of @DOGE---with then-Acting SG Sarah Harris and many others---I really appreciate how the SG's Office frames the issue. 2/
2
86
896
46,295
Turning to the merits, for most of our history the political branches waged interbranch conflicts using the substantial weapons the framers gave them. The notion that judges would referee disputes between Congress and the President would have shocked the founding generation. 6/
4
111
901
38,012
This litigation is important. But it also highlights the importance of procedure. DOJ *won* its appeal, but the DC Circuit's refusal to issue its "mandate"---an obscure term if ever there was one---now threatens to impose a constructive loss, costing us all billions of $$. /10
5
134
872
24,618
Second, you might be wondering why @TheJusticeDept is seeking emergency relief in a case it *won*. Even though the DC Circuit deemed the district court's injunction patently unlawful, that injunction dissolves only when the DC Circuit issues its formal mandate. 3/
1
89
864
42,636
PS - I will post a link to the stay application when it appears on the Supreme Court website. Had to pull this off the DC Circuit docket via PACER and can't figure out how to post a full PDF to X.
22
70
836
22,280
No surprise here - the Chief Justice just granted an administrative stay, which I expect will quickly become a full stay pending certiorari and merits review. More winning for @TheJusticeDept @AGPamBondi and SG John Sauer.
And now @AGPamBondi SG Sauer and @TheJusticeDept have sought emergency relief at the Supreme Court from the injunction reinstating Slaughter to the @FTC. 1/
15
190
817
53,897
Though the district court did not interfere in the terminations, it enjoined the Administration from "impounding" funds Congress appropriated to USAID for foreign aid. Impoundment basically means not spending appropriated funds. 6/
5
89
831
50,987
Bottom line: @POTUS has broad authority over @TheJusticeDept and who serves in it. That includes US Attorneys. There is this a clear legal path to keep @USAttyHabba in office if the Administration wants to take it. /fin
14
163
811
26,232
The DC Circuit notes that the Comptroller General has a statutory cause of action to sue. But it is far from clear that inter-branch litigation is constitutional. During Trump 45, I argued in McGahn and other cases it is not. I think the Supreme Court will agree. 12/
3
78
824
37,772
Impoundment is a hot topic that @RussVought47 and @MarkPaoletta at OMB--both extremely knowledgeable and determined cost-cutters--have thought about *a lot.*
Mark and his Deputy at OMB Dan Shapiro have a scholarly article on the topic: americarenewing.com/the-pres… 7/
6
128
815
50,639
That's why the lower court revolt is so destructive. Without vertical stare decisis, we no longer have a functional legal system. We no longer have law in the basic sense of predictable and consistent rules. We just have the whims of scattered district judges. 4/
11
98
800
17,837
That's a big deal! It would judicially restrict @realDonaldTrump's discretion over how and whether to spend appropriated funds in an area--foreign affairs--where presidential power is at its zenith. 9/
1
86
791
41,686
One judge complains that the Supreme Court isn't backing up the lower courts--a truly astonishing claim. The Justices took an oath to uphold the law; not get the "backs" of lower court judges trying to wage war on the Executive Branch. 9/
7
106
792
14,040
When lower court judges defy the Supreme Court--as has been happening time and again--that is lawless. Plain and simple. The President has Article II arguments to invoke when he interprets and considers judicial commands. Lower court judges have nada vis the Supreme Court. 3/
4
111
775
14,030
These judges are not attempting to rule in a manner consistent with how the Supreme Court would apply the law. They are trying to manipulate the law to achieve their preferred outcome. That is the imposition of will not the application of law. 7/
8
87
767
20,989
First, the basics. The Constitution creates only one court--the Supreme Court. It authorizes Congress to create "inferior courts," but does not mandate them. And the judicial power of these subordinate courts is entirely subordinate to the Supreme Court's. 2/
11
105
751
17,226
District judges have life tenure to ensure they have the independence to apply the law correctly. It is not so they can apply the law they wish existed. Justice Gorsuch was correct to admonish the lower courts. The Supreme Court must remain resolute in enforcing its dictates. /end
25
110
754
13,695
But everything changed at one of our all-time nadirs of presidential power--the post-Nixon era--when Congress, among other things, enacted the Impoundment Control Act. That Act imposes a complex process for rescinding funds, as DOJ explains. 7/
2
87
752
32,508
First the basics. Article II vests all executive power in the President. That includes the prosecution power of U.S. Attorneys. For @POTUS to properly exercise that power, he must be able to freely hire and fire all subordinates who wield it. 2/
2
119
745
25,772
If the CG doesn't/can't sue and private parties can't sue, there may never be a suit at all. This is esoteric legal procedure, but as you can see it has major substantive implications. Will be watching for the next shoe to drop. 15/
4
61
735
31,806
But what about @USAttyHabba? @realdonaldtrump is entitled to keep her in office for as long as he wants. The simplest path would be for @AGPamBondi to appoint @USAttyHabba the “First Assistant United States Attorney” in New Jersey. Then, under a different statute (the Federal Vacancies Act), @USAttyHabba would again be Acting U.S. Attorney (now via her status as the "first assistant" to that role). 7/
9
139
722
39,008
OK back to USAID. The upshot of Judge Ali's injunction was that he was ordering the Administration to spend every dollar Congress had appropriated to USAID. In other words, he was ordering the Administration to not "impound" any funds. 8/
3
81
721
44,111
Some act like this is an indictment of the Supreme Court. It is not. It is an indictment of some lower courts and a testament to SG Sauer's discretion about what he brings to the Justices. I plan to post a bit about the latter point next week.
And the supposedly “lawless” administration extends its win streak at the highest court in the land to something like 20-0
13
91
688
41,057
Second and again, when lower court judges assert their power based on will rather than law they are jumping under the bus. Nobody is throwing them there. And the Supreme Court is duty bound to correct such errors. Want less criticism? Do law better. 11/
2
84
706
12,987
At least one of our anonymous judges--an Obama appointee we are told--can see what's really going on here. 13/
3
91
700
12,713
These judges then--incredibly--have the gall to complain about their willfulness meeting a predictable, swift demise at the Supreme Court. Tip: if you don't want it to look like you did "shoddy work," then start following the Supreme Court's lead. 8/
8
73
688
13,912
The @WSJopinion has an editorial today arguing three basic things: (1) Emil Bove is a poor judicial nominee, (2) his nomination will stop other judges from retiring, (3) other Trump nominees are better and will induce more retirements. I broadly disagree. 1/
63
143
668
80,636
Or if @TheJusticeDept really wanted to underscore the point, @realdonaldtrump could remove the judges' selected US Attorney and @AGPamBondi could potentially reappoint @USAttyHabba under the same AG Appt statute used before. Nothing in the statute clearly precludes this. 9/
4
110
655
27,133
As Chief Justice Taft—a former @POTUS himself—wrote in Myers: “The President, alone and unaided, could not execute the laws. He must execute them by the assistance of subordinates.” Again, that includes US Attorneys. 3/
1
98
664
25,447
The Comptroller General is also a constitutional oddity--an officer the President appoints who sits inside Congress and can be removed only by joint congressional resolution. This odd office produced a famous Supreme Court case (Bowsher v Synar) that is beyond this thread. 13/
4
64
664
35,403
The @thejusticedept knows this, as they recently did the same in the Northern District of New York @NDNYnews for John Sarcone—another US Attorney whom @AGPamBondi appointed and whom the Administration is entitled to keep. 8/
wxxinews.org/new-york-public…
3
125
649
29,501
I am not aware of a modern example of courts exercising this supposed power to install a US Attorney, but @realDonaldTrump could plainly remove any such person immediately pursuant to Article II. That issue would (or should) be 9-0 at the Supreme Court. 6/
16
106
652
31,237
For present purposes, what matters is that Congress can remove the Comptroller General by joint resolution. Would current congressional leadership permit the CG to sue the Trump Administration over impoundment? I am skeptical, depending on the facts. 14/
1
61
631
32,410
This boycott, if real, likely violated the antitrust laws. And the nonprofit Media Matters is alleged to have been a ringleader in the boycott. That's the basic allegation @elonmusk's suit made and it is facially credible. 3/
5
82
618
22,340
Hamilton wrote in Federalist 78 that the judiciary is the least dangerous branch because it has neither force nor will but merely judgment. Through lawless orders, inappropriate leaks, and other acts of defiance, some lower court judges are testing that proposition. 14/
9
85
620
13,915
This case arises from the notorious advertiser boycott of online platforms. It's easy to forget, but not long ago many companies refused to advertise on platforms--in particular, @X--unless those platforms suppressed, eg, conservative speech or true information about Covid. 2/
4
86
605
24,315
Bottom line. District judges continue deploying aggressive, motivated reasoning to disable the elected President and his appointees from enforcing the law. This destabilizes the system and puts yet more pressure on the Supreme Court. Here's another the Justices will need to fix. /end
14
103
593
17,859
Ok lets get to New Jersey. There is a statute that allows the Attorney General to appoint US Attorneys directly—appointments last 120 days. @AGPamBondi appointed @USAttyHabba under this provision. 4/
1
98
609
26,550
Some more thoughts from me on this decision in CNN, focused on Justice Gorsuch's separate writing. I also want to respond to a point @steve_vladeck makes in the article. 1/
Another win for @TheJusticeDept before the Supreme Court--this time on whether district courts can enjoin the termination of grants that conflict with the Administration's anti-DEI policies. Lots of interesting opinions, worth a brief discussion. 1/
13
121
598
35,334
Some of the judges claim the Chief Justice should speak out as he has otherwise thrown them "under the bus." First, the Chief should (in my view) speak only in official communications, primarily opinions; press statements are too political for the Justices. 10/
7
52
584
13,187
Kudos to @BoydenGrayPLLC and Attorneys General Barr, Sessions, and Mukasey for filing this brief in support of @JeffClarkUS's filing in the DC Court of Appeals opposing the DC Bar's effort to take his license. 1/
9
136
576
65,308
Mandate just issued from DC Circuit with explanatory orders. Big win for @TheJusticeDept; below explains why the mandate matters. Will post the document whenever I get to a computer.
BREAKING: @AGPamBondi and SG John Sauer have filed an emergency application in the Supreme Court regarding their huge win in the USAID impoundment case, which we discussed previously. This is a big deal, as I'll explain. 1/
7
131
586
82,633
Come on. Some judges are taking extreme positions--Supreme Court emergency orders are not binding, the Supreme Court stayed the TRO but not the identical PI, claims for money can be in district court if they involve constitutional claims--to rule against the Administration. 6/
1
46
568
12,866
Important dispute that hasn't gotten enough attention: The removal by @realDonaldTrump of Sheila Perlmutter from the US Copyright Office. 1/
5
100
572
22,031
Nor do I have sympathy for the criticism that the Justices need to write more for the public's sake. The Justices are dealing with an unprecedented onslaught of lower court emergency orders against the Administration; of course they will be issue more emergency orders too. 12/
4
52
564
13,034
The same statute says if there is no senate-confirmed US Attorney after 120 days, then “the district court for such district may appoint a United States attorney to serve until the vacancy is filled.” 28 USC 546(d). Wait what? The judges pick their own prosecutor? 5/
3
91
549
29,402
How do you figure out whether allegations are credible? You investigate them. That's what the @FTC is trying to do--conduct an investigation to determine whether Media Matters did, in fact, organize an illegal boycott of certain platforms. 4/
3
65
533
17,079
So lets turn to the article and the specious claims several judges anonymously passed to NBC to criticize their superiors. First, they repeat a claim others have made---judges are trying their best to follow the law but are just confused about the right answer. 5/
8
44
524
14,068
First, high level. As we all know, the Biden DOJ conducted a sweeping criminal investigation and prosecution of @realDonaldTrump. Consider the outrage if a district court had enjoined the *investigation itself* on grounds of First Amendment retaliation. 7/
3
59
511
15,361
It will work.
NEW: The Trump administration is making a last ditch series of maneuvers to keep Alina Habba in as the top federal prosecutor in New Jersey. It might work.
w/ @ryrivard
politico.com/news/2025/07/24…
10
66
507
122,677
Vibe shift
JUST IN: 1st Circuit lifts the injunctions against the Big Beautiful Bill ban on federal funding for Planned Parenthood. 3-0. No substantive explanation. Judges Gelpi (Biden)/Montecalvo (Biden)/Aframe (Biden). Doc:
documentcloud.org/documents/… Earlier: politico.com/live-updates/20…
10
46
505
63,314
Cert worthy if it comes to that.
BREAKING: Pam Bondi says DOJ will be appealing the “woefully insufficient sentence” of 8 years given by Biden appointed Judge Deborah Boardman to trans-identifying attempted assassin Nicholas Roske.
@AGPamBondi: “The attempted assassination of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh was a disgusting attack against our entire judicial system by a profoundly disturbed individual. The Department of Justice will be appealing the woefully insufficient sentence imposed by the district court, which does not reflect the horrific facts of this case.”
9
70
508
65,891
Back to this case. Media Matters--like any investigative target--does not want to be investigated. So it sued in DDC to enjoin the *investigation itself.* Media Matters says it has a First Amendment right to not be investigated *at all.* 5/
6
68
471
18,054
Here's the link: documentcloud.org/documents/…
16
70
448
18,032
Such an injunction would have been eminently warranted under this opinion's standard. There is no serious question that the Biden DOJ pursued its cases against @realDonaldTrump because he had been President and was running to be President again. 8/
3
46
439
14,553
Endorse. I was lucky to have a close friend in biglaw who helped me with the Mueller investigation in 45. Not everyone is so lucky. Our friends in the Administration need us to have their backs. Know @genehamilton agrees.
Young staffers should not have to stress over potential six figure legal bills.
It would be a gesture of goodwill, and also politically savvy, for Joe Lonsdale and Bill Ackman to stand up a legal defense PAC immediately and let it be known that first rate lawyers will be ready.
10
77
448
99,398
Honored to represent @douglassmackey in our effort to obtain justice for Doug after what the Biden DOJ did to him and his family. And extremely grateful to @DonaldJTrumpJr for having us on his show to discuss!
BREAKING: Doug Mackey retains James @BurnhamDC, former general counsel to DOGE, to file a claim with the Justice Department.
It’s not just about the money, Burnham says, but also holding individuals accountable. Will explore lawsuits, misconduct complaints, investigations.
6
113
441
93,636
Judge Sooknanan relies on the investigation chilling Media Matter's First Amendment activity. Does anyone seriously contest that the avalanche of federal and state prosecutions of @realDonaldTrump chilled his activity? Time in the courtroom is time off the campaign trail. 10/
3
54
433
13,669
Nor did President Biden play coy about @realDonaldTrump and @realDonaldTrump's constitutionally protected political activities. Yet here, fears about a "partisan bent" stop the investigation before it starts. Two tiers of justice? 9/
2
53
431
15,237
So now what? It seems obvious that state bars cannot dictate how federal Justice Department lawyers represent the Executive Branch. And it seems equally obvious that government lawyers--already making significant financial and personal sacrifice to serve their country--should be maximally shielded from this type of harassment. 5/
8
75
431
16,196
The harassment is, of course, the point. This group doesn't care if these lawyers actually face sanction. Its goal is to intimidate them into chilling their advocacy on behalf of the Executive Branch. It wants to pressure them, in other words, to be less zealous lawyers. 6/
6
78
430
18,050
The district court agreed. The gist of Judge Sooknanan's opinion is that because certain @FTC officials expressed views that the alleged boycott is serious and that Media Matters engages in poor behavior, they are constitutionally foreclosed from conducting an investigation. 6/
12
55
421
16,766
Second, the complainant appears to be a random group funded by left-wing dark money. (The "Legal Accountability Center"; Orwell would be proud.) It is not a former client or current litigant. It's seemingly some activists paid to read X all day, then harass government lawyers based on public reporting. 3/
8
78
411
15,260
Only in January of 2023 did AG Garland take that step, years into the Administration, after @realDonaldTrump had announced his reelection campaign, and after months of leaks about how President Biden was upset that AG Garland hadn't acted. Talk about a partisan bent! 13/
1
53
402
18,609
I'm sure lawyers @TheJusticeDept are crafting arguments to resist the attack on @JeffClarkUS and this new assault on line attorneys. I am too, so please share ideas. As @genehamilton and I have discussed, defending the rule of law requires that we stick up for public officials who spend each day trying to uphold it. /fin
18
82
408
12,162