Dear Texas: When your argument is that election procedures were adopted in violation of the Electors clause, the only evidence you need to "marshal" is "what election procedures were adopted and how"

You don't need weeks, a magnifying glass, and Melissa Carone

Seriously people. Executive orders mean exactly nothing to what Trump legally can or can't do to fuck with the election results (which is zero). Stop letting idiots make you crazy

There are two very simple, very basic reasons executive orders are meaningless here. Understand them, please

1) the president cannot issue an executive order that grants himself a power he does not already have. For example, the president could not issue an executive order saying that from now on he can make laws they don't need to pass Congress

(I mean, he could sign an executive order saying that, but it wouldn't have any legal effect)

2) the president can issue executive orders at any time.

So, on the subject of bonkers hyperbolic pretzeling over the Bell judgement, Grace 'destroy books I don't like & make inappropriate jokes about sterilising teenage girls' Lavery has some thoughts.

Tell me why my feminism is wrong Grace.

Oh

Well, if anyone thought the Bell judgment was going to make TRAs reconsider making massively overblown claims with no evidence backed up with nothing but a thick wadge of emotional blackmail.... HAHAHA, no one thought that.

A high court in the UK made a delimited judgment about teenager's ability to consent to puberty blockers. This puts all trans people everywhere in the world at risk.

Because if any human anywhere has any thoughts that deviate in any way from the rote line dictated by

the trans rights movement, this puts all trans people everywhere in mortal danger.

Let's be honest Grace. It doesn't put trans people at risk. It puts trans ideology at risk. Because trans ideology depends on the idea of innate gender identity, and the trans child is the

necessary material evidence of the ontology of gender identity.

That is, children are being medicalised to provide evidence to underwrite adults identities.

Nothing to see here.

Five years ago this week in a 6-3 decision, the United States Supreme Court declared that its prior 2012 ruling in Miller v. Alabama applied retroactively, thereby requiring that hundreds of former life-sentenced children like myself be resentenced.

I recall that day being one of subdued jubilation tempered by cautious optimism, having absolutely no confidence in how the sentencing judge or the parole board would respond to this High Court mandate. Would I be given an opportunity to live a meaningful life…

...or would I be condemned to prison for the rest of my life? Terrifying questions that had no immediate answers.

On June 27, 2017, I was resentenced to a term of 30-to-life. Following a successful parole hearing in August, on October 10, 2017, after being disappeared from society for over three decades, I walked out of prison on parole for life.

Sadly, in the four-year interim between the Miller and Montgomery decisions, my mother lost her battle with cancer. She was my last surviving (immediate) family member. For me, the Montgomery decision serves as a painfully cruel reminder that “justice delayed, is justice denied.”

1] Family handcuffed at gunpoint by police sues Aurora, Colorado. Terrible images in the complaint. These cases are filed all the time. This time it's different: Colorado has a new law.

2] According to the complaint, APD relied on license plate scanner that indicated plt's license plate matched
that of a stolen vehicle. But it was a motorcycle with Montana plates, not an SUV with Colorado plates, which was what plt was driving.

3] This would be a challenge to win in Federal Court. Police "can rely on information obtained from a police computer database in order to establish probable cause." Hughes v. McWilliams, (SDNY 2009).

4] Police reliance on cpu information is "reasonable even if the information is incorrect, provided the police officer did not know or have reason to know that the information was false or unreliable." Arizona v. Evans, 514 U.S. 1, 15-16 (1995).

5] But it seems from the Complaint that the police knew that the vehicles didn't match and possibly that the states were wrong (and aren't motorcycle plates a different size?).

Ok so first of all - Twitter/GDPR/what to do! So firstly, the court needs to make the order for Twitter to disclose the data, which they may not do as it’s a) disproportionate b) a waste of time c) complex involving international law d) ridiculous….

In addition, AH has already been told she cannot pursue this in the VA trial, so it’s a pointless exercise! I feel this approach re twitter is v much an “AH” idea; not advice from a lawyer… as it’s not going to accomplish anything and is a waste of time.

In any event; re GDPR - while the laws around GDPR are v strict, where it comes to information being disclosed in the course of legal proceedings, it is more tricky. The issue has been argued in other cases - esp re disclosure of UK/EU citizens’s info in US legal proceedings.

And in simple terms, the bottom line is, if the court orders it, it can be disclosed. The question then is, what to do about it. Well, you could kick up a stink, file a motion to quash it etc.. etc… but I’m not here to give any individuals legal advice.

However, while it might be tempting to create almighty hell over it, here’s a thought… you all know you are real people right? So you could all give AH what she wants & simply let her look utterly ridiculous! So she gets the info - then what?