Leave a Reply
Want to join the discussion?Feel free to contribute!
Feel free to contribute!
Lindsey the Insurance Lawyer’s Disappearing Agreement to a Litigation... Lindsey the Insurance Lawyer’s Disappearing Agreement to a Litigation...
Hi Dr. Wheeler,
Can you define what I believe you were referring to as ‘on bank’ (in reference to the 9th circuit)?
Thanks!
I ain’t no lawyer and haven’t even listened (yet) to this podcast. My guess is the phrase is “en banc” which to quote our still existent resource (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/En_banc) means ” In law, an en banc session is when all the judges of a court sit to hear a case, not just one judge or a smaller panel of judges.”
I’ve learned more about law, especially as applies at the federal level, from this wonderful site (EmptyWheel). Unfortunately, I’ve learned way too much law at the civil level from small-town lawyers etc.
It is curious also that the term “bankrupt” may have a common origin. Bankrupt’s etymology may stem from the bench where bankers and customers conducted transactions. If the agreement failed, the bench was broken (bankrupt).
The “broken bench” or “banca rotta” in Italian dates back to the Medici bankers in Florence, I believe. “Ruptus’ is the Latin past participle of rumpere, to break.
And the courts sometimes are on our side:
https://apnews.com/live/donald-trump-news-updates-10-31-2025
Live updates: Trump administration must fund SNAP payments during the shutdown, judges rule
All 29 of the 9th circuit court voted on whether to hear the appeal of the TRO before a larger panel.
11 judges will hear the appeal of the TRO including Judge Graber who wrote a dissent in the 3 judge ruling. Mean while in today in Portland Judge Immergut finishes holding 3 days of hearings on the case.
https://www.opb.org/article/2025/10/28/portland-oregon-national-guard-deployment-ice-protest/
In the Portland hearings, the DoJ attorneys kept trying to introduce documents into evidence that their own witness denied seeing before. That means no foundation to admit the exhibits. The DoJ also tried to object to defense exhibits they previously stipulated as factual which Judge Immergut overruled with a pointed comment.
Only the best people remains this administration’s epitaph and it’s about the only thing that will save us, this time.
Seems like this is an appropriate place to put this piece from Lawfare:
The Appellate Void: Trump Could Defy Judges Without Confronting the Supreme Court
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-appellate-void–trump-could-defy-judges-without-confronting-the-supreme-court
Thanks. That is one scary article!
OT, however insightful and excellent regarding gerrymandering. Wow!
American Conversations: David Daley
Heather Cox Richardson talked to David Daley about gerrymandering, the upcoming elections, and the Voting Rights Act. Daley is a journalist and a senior fellow at FairVote.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-z60SVEtxU&t=29s)
I hope I don’t appear to be taking advantage of a large blank space in these comments, but I also wanted to touch on Marcy’s comments about how trump is trying to get his message out on social media. She mentions several times the xitter or that “truth” thingee.
My sense is that the trump message is very adequately conveyed by the traditional sources such as Fox. Amplifying this is the sometimes subtle wording from the NYT and WaPo. But I think one of the biggest assists to his anti-Democrat messaging comes from CNN. Their coverage may appear a bit less biased but their messaging is strongly critical of anything democratic.