banner
LightNews
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark
@kathleenclark.bsky.social
5.9K followers 230 following 1.7K posts
Attorney - Professor - Views are my own, not my employer. she/her
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
More Justice Department difficulties with Tables of Contents (among other problems)
bradmossesq.bsky.social
Bradley P. Moss @bradmossesq.bsky.social · 2d
Someone gonna get fired …. @kenwhite.bsky.social @annabower.bsky.social
2
Reposted by Kathleen Clark
joesudbay.bsky.social
Joe Sudbay @joesudbay.bsky.social · 2d
nice work by @akalhan.bsky.social defining #kavanaughstop
motherjones.com
Mother Jones @motherjones.com · 2d
Lawyers have been publicizing a new term to describe ICE's racially targeted detainments: a “Kavanaugh stop.”

Mother Jones reporter Pema Levy explains in this new video:
2 21 55
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
erikhalvorsen.bsky.social
Erik Halvorsen @erikhalvorsen.bsky.social · 2d
Hello @columbiauniversity.bsky.social @harvard.edu
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
A master class from MIT in responding to authoritarian overreach:

Your “premise … is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone.
… America’s leadership in science & innovation depends on independent thinking & open competition for excellence.
1 7
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
❤️ of Abrego Garcia’s argument today:

The government is “holding him for purpose of punishing him for exercising his legal rights or for political purposes.
if govt legitimately wanted to remove him, they had a clear pathway in Costa Rica.”
rparloff.bsky.social
Roger Parloff @rparloff.bsky.social · 2d
Rossman: they're holding him for purpose of punishing him for exercising his legal rights or for political purposes. if govt legitimately wanted to remove him, they had a clear pathway in Costa Rica. That's not govt's aim. aim instead is to ID series of countries that have no connection to

/175
2 4
Reposted by Kathleen Clark
sanwil.bsky.social
Sandy @sanwil.bsky.social · 2d
📢 May other academic institutions learn from MIT
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
A master class from MIT in responding to authoritarian overreach:

Your “premise … is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone.
… America’s leadership in science & innovation depends on independent thinking & open competition for excellence.
Dear Madam Secretary, I write in response to your letter of October 1, inviting MIT to review a "Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education." I acknowledge the vital importance of these matters. I appreciated the chance to meet with you earlier this year to discuss the priorities we share for American higher education. As we discussed, the Institute's mission of service to the nation directs us to advance knowledge, educate students and bring knowledge to bear on the world's great challenges. We do that in line with a clear set of values, with excellence above all. Some practical examples: • MIT prides itself on rewarding merit. Students, faculty and staff succeed here based on the strength of their talent, ideas and hard work. For instance, the Institute was the first to reinstate the SAT/ACT requirement after the pandemic. And MIT has never had legacy preferences in admissions. • MIT opens its doors to the most talented students regardless of their family's finances. Admissions are need-blind. Incoming undergraduates whose families earn less than $200,000 a year pay no tuition. Nearly 88% of our last graduating class left MIT with no debt for their education. We make a wealth of free courses and low-cost certificates available to any American with an internet connection. Of the undergraduate degrees we award, 94% are in STEM fields. And in service to the nation, we cap enrollment of international undergraduates at roughly 10%. source: https://orgchart.mit.edu/letters/regarding-compact • We value free expression, as clearly described in the MIT Statement on Freedom of Expression and Academic Freedom. We must hear facts and opinions we don't like - and engage respectfully with those with whom we disagree. These values and other MIT practices meet or exceed many standards outlined in the document you sent. We freely choose these values because they're right, and we live by them because they support our mission - work of immense value to the prosperity, competitiveness, health and security of the United States. And of course, MIT abides by the law. The document also includes principles with which we disagree, including those that would restrict freedom of expression and our independence as an institution. And fundamentally, the premise of the document is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone. In our view, America's leadership in science and innovation depends on independent thinking and open competition for excellence. In that free marketplace of ideas, the people of MIT gladly compete with the very best, without preferences. Therefore, with respect, we cannot support the proposed approach to addressing the issues facing higher education. As you know, MIT's record of service to the nation is long and enduring. Eight decades ago, MIT leaders helped invent a scientific partnership between America's research universities and the U.S. government that has delivered extraordinary benefits for the American people. We continue to believe in the power of this partnership to serve the nation. Sincerely, Sally Kornbluth
3 5
Reposted by Kathleen Clark
jonahblank.bsky.social
Jonah Blank @jonahblank.bsky.social · 2d
Ivy Leaguers often look on #MIT as a bunch geeks doing nerdly things in a lab.

But half of the Ivy League-- Columbia, Dartmouth, U Penn and Brown-- have already bowed down to Trump. Harvard & Cornell in negotiations.

The nerds at MIT have stood strong. Read their note, and do the same.
💪🏼💪🏼💪🏼
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
A master class from MIT in responding to authoritarian overreach:

Your “premise … is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone.
… America’s leadership in science & innovation depends on independent thinking & open competition for excellence.
Dear Madam Secretary, I write in response to your letter of October 1, inviting MIT to review a "Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education." I acknowledge the vital importance of these matters. I appreciated the chance to meet with you earlier this year to discuss the priorities we share for American higher education. As we discussed, the Institute's mission of service to the nation directs us to advance knowledge, educate students and bring knowledge to bear on the world's great challenges. We do that in line with a clear set of values, with excellence above all. Some practical examples: • MIT prides itself on rewarding merit. Students, faculty and staff succeed here based on the strength of their talent, ideas and hard work. For instance, the Institute was the first to reinstate the SAT/ACT requirement after the pandemic. And MIT has never had legacy preferences in admissions. • MIT opens its doors to the most talented students regardless of their family's finances. Admissions are need-blind. Incoming undergraduates whose families earn less than $200,000 a year pay no tuition. Nearly 88% of our last graduating class left MIT with no debt for their education. We make a wealth of free courses and low-cost certificates available to any American with an internet connection. Of the undergraduate degrees we award, 94% are in STEM fields. And in service to the nation, we cap enrollment of international undergraduates at roughly 10%. source: https://orgchart.mit.edu/letters/regarding-compact • We value free expression, as clearly described in the MIT Statement on Freedom of Expression and Academic Freedom. We must hear facts and opinions we don't like - and engage respectfully with those with whom we disagree. These values and other MIT practices meet or exceed many standards outlined in the document you sent. We freely choose these values because they're right, and we live by them because they support our mission - work of immense value to the prosperity, competitiveness, health and security of the United States. And of course, MIT abides by the law. The document also includes principles with which we disagree, including those that would restrict freedom of expression and our independence as an institution. And fundamentally, the premise of the document is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone. In our view, America's leadership in science and innovation depends on independent thinking and open competition for excellence. In that free marketplace of ideas, the people of MIT gladly compete with the very best, without preferences. Therefore, with respect, we cannot support the proposed approach to addressing the issues facing higher education. As you know, MIT's record of service to the nation is long and enduring. Eight decades ago, MIT leaders helped invent a scientific partnership between America's research universities and the U.S. government that has delivered extraordinary benefits for the American people. We continue to believe in the power of this partnership to serve the nation. Sincerely, Sally Kornbluth
6 14
Reposted by Kathleen Clark
jtlg.bsky.social
James Grimmelmann @jtlg.bsky.social · 2d
MIT understands its mission and values.

orgchart.mit.edu/letters/rega...
Regarding the Compact | MIT Organization Chart
orgchart.mit.edu
5 13
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
microbesatsea.bsky.social
Nastassia Patin @microbesatsea.bsky.social · 2d
@ucsandiego.bsky.social @uofcalifornia.bsky.social please take note, this is how you can show courage and integrity.
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
A master class from MIT in responding to authoritarian overreach:

Your “premise … is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone.
… America’s leadership in science & innovation depends on independent thinking & open competition for excellence.
1 2 13
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
Lovely to see folks re-posting this & tagging their own universities or alma maters:
jftitone.bsky.social
Jeanine Finn @jftitone.bsky.social · 2d
@utaustin.bsky.social Your alums are watching.
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
A master class from MIT in responding to authoritarian overreach:

Your “premise … is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone.
… America’s leadership in science & innovation depends on independent thinking & open competition for excellence.
1 1 23
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
Another impressive highlight from MIT’s response to the proposed “compact:”

“MIT has never had legacy preferences in admissions.”
Dear Madam Secretary, I write in response to your letter of October 1, inviting MIT to review a "Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education." I acknowledge the vital importance of these matters. I appreciated the chance to meet with you earlier this year to discuss the priorities we share for American higher education. As we discussed, the Institute's mission of service to the nation directs us to advance knowledge, educate students and bring knowledge to bear on the world's great challenges. We do that in line with a clear set of values, with excellence above all. Some practical examples: • MIT prides itself on rewarding merit. Students, faculty and staff succeed here based on the strength of their talent, ideas and hard work. For instance, the Institute was the first to reinstate the SAT/ACT requirement after the pandemic. And MIT has never had legacy preferences in admissions. • MIT opens its doors to the most talented students regardless of their family's finances. Admissions are need-blind. Incoming undergraduates whose families earn less than $200,000 a year pay no tuition. Nearly 88% of our last graduating class left MIT with no debt for their education. We make a wealth of free courses and low-cost certificates available to any American with an internet connection. Of the undergraduate degrees we award, 94% are in STEM fields. And in service to the nation, we cap enrollment of international undergraduates at roughly 10%.
4 21 110
Reposted by Kathleen Clark
security-mike-c.bsky.social
Mike C ⓥ @security-mike-c.bsky.social · 2d
And for those who need the alt-text:

bsky.app/profile/kath...
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
A master class from MIT in responding to authoritarian overreach:

Your “premise … is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone.
… America’s leadership in science & innovation depends on independent thinking & open competition for excellence.
Dear Madam Secretary, I write in response to your letter of October 1, inviting MIT to review a "Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education." I acknowledge the vital importance of these matters. I appreciated the chance to meet with you earlier this year to discuss the priorities we share for American higher education. As we discussed, the Institute's mission of service to the nation directs us to advance knowledge, educate students and bring knowledge to bear on the world's great challenges. We do that in line with a clear set of values, with excellence above all. Some practical examples: • MIT prides itself on rewarding merit. Students, faculty and staff succeed here based on the strength of their talent, ideas and hard work. For instance, the Institute was the first to reinstate the SAT/ACT requirement after the pandemic. And MIT has never had legacy preferences in admissions. • MIT opens its doors to the most talented students regardless of their family's finances. Admissions are need-blind. Incoming undergraduates whose families earn less than $200,000 a year pay no tuition. Nearly 88% of our last graduating class left MIT with no debt for their education. We make a wealth of free courses and low-cost certificates available to any American with an internet connection. Of the undergraduate degrees we award, 94% are in STEM fields. And in service to the nation, we cap enrollment of international undergraduates at roughly 10%. source: https://orgchart.mit.edu/letters/regarding-compact • We value free expression, as clearly described in the MIT Statement on Freedom of Expression and Academic Freedom. We must hear facts and opinions we don't like - and engage respectfully with those with whom we disagree. These values and other MIT practices meet or exceed many standards outlined in the document you sent. We freely choose these values because they're right, and we live by them because they support our mission - work of immense value to the prosperity, competitiveness, health and security of the United States. And of course, MIT abides by the law. The document also includes principles with which we disagree, including those that would restrict freedom of expression and our independence as an institution. And fundamentally, the premise of the document is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone. In our view, America's leadership in science and innovation depends on independent thinking and open competition for excellence. In that free marketplace of ideas, the people of MIT gladly compete with the very best, without preferences. Therefore, with respect, we cannot support the proposed approach to addressing the issues facing higher education. As you know, MIT's record of service to the nation is long and enduring. Eight decades ago, MIT leaders helped invent a scientific partnership between America's research universities and the U.S. government that has delivered extraordinary benefits for the American people. We continue to believe in the power of this partnership to serve the nation. Sincerely, Sally Kornbluth
7 22
Reposted by Kathleen Clark
brendannyhan.bsky.social
Brendan Nyhan @brendannyhan.bsky.social · 2d
Every targeted institution (my own very much included) should cut and paste this letter onto their letterhead.
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
A master class from MIT in responding to authoritarian overreach:

Your “premise … is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone.
… America’s leadership in science & innovation depends on independent thinking & open competition for excellence.
Dear Madam Secretary, I write in response to your letter of October 1, inviting MIT to review a "Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education." I acknowledge the vital importance of these matters. I appreciated the chance to meet with you earlier this year to discuss the priorities we share for American higher education. As we discussed, the Institute's mission of service to the nation directs us to advance knowledge, educate students and bring knowledge to bear on the world's great challenges. We do that in line with a clear set of values, with excellence above all. Some practical examples: • MIT prides itself on rewarding merit. Students, faculty and staff succeed here based on the strength of their talent, ideas and hard work. For instance, the Institute was the first to reinstate the SAT/ACT requirement after the pandemic. And MIT has never had legacy preferences in admissions. • MIT opens its doors to the most talented students regardless of their family's finances. Admissions are need-blind. Incoming undergraduates whose families earn less than $200,000 a year pay no tuition. Nearly 88% of our last graduating class left MIT with no debt for their education. We make a wealth of free courses and low-cost certificates available to any American with an internet connection. Of the undergraduate degrees we award, 94% are in STEM fields. And in service to the nation, we cap enrollment of international undergraduates at roughly 10%. source: https://orgchart.mit.edu/letters/regarding-compact • We value free expression, as clearly described in the MIT Statement on Freedom of Expression and Academic Freedom. We must hear facts and opinions we don't like - and engage respectfully with those with whom we disagree. These values and other MIT practices meet or exceed many standards outlined in the document you sent. We freely choose these values because they're right, and we live by them because they support our mission - work of immense value to the prosperity, competitiveness, health and security of the United States. And of course, MIT abides by the law. The document also includes principles with which we disagree, including those that would restrict freedom of expression and our independence as an institution. And fundamentally, the premise of the document is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone. In our view, America's leadership in science and innovation depends on independent thinking and open competition for excellence. In that free marketplace of ideas, the people of MIT gladly compete with the very best, without preferences. Therefore, with respect, we cannot support the proposed approach to addressing the issues facing higher education. As you know, MIT's record of service to the nation is long and enduring. Eight decades ago, MIT leaders helped invent a scientific partnership between America's research universities and the U.S. government that has delivered extraordinary benefits for the American people. We continue to believe in the power of this partnership to serve the nation. Sincerely, Sally Kornbluth
3 150 570
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
You’re not wrong, particularly about the key role that racism played in Trump’s rise to power.

@donmoyn.bsky.social’s article focused on describing the impact of a personalist regime on administrative capacity — rather than explaining his rise to power.

Here’s a related blog post:
The Personalist Presidency
Three ways that Trump's politicization really is different
donmoynihan.substack.com
2
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
A master class from MIT in responding to authoritarian overreach:

Your “premise … is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone.
… America’s leadership in science & innovation depends on independent thinking & open competition for excellence.
Dear Madam Secretary, I write in response to your letter of October 1, inviting MIT to review a "Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education." I acknowledge the vital importance of these matters. I appreciated the chance to meet with you earlier this year to discuss the priorities we share for American higher education. As we discussed, the Institute's mission of service to the nation directs us to advance knowledge, educate students and bring knowledge to bear on the world's great challenges. We do that in line with a clear set of values, with excellence above all. Some practical examples: • MIT prides itself on rewarding merit. Students, faculty and staff succeed here based on the strength of their talent, ideas and hard work. For instance, the Institute was the first to reinstate the SAT/ACT requirement after the pandemic. And MIT has never had legacy preferences in admissions. • MIT opens its doors to the most talented students regardless of their family's finances. Admissions are need-blind. Incoming undergraduates whose families earn less than $200,000 a year pay no tuition. Nearly 88% of our last graduating class left MIT with no debt for their education. We make a wealth of free courses and low-cost certificates available to any American with an internet connection. Of the undergraduate degrees we award, 94% are in STEM fields. And in service to the nation, we cap enrollment of international undergraduates at roughly 10%. source: https://orgchart.mit.edu/letters/regarding-compact • We value free expression, as clearly described in the MIT Statement on Freedom of Expression and Academic Freedom. We must hear facts and opinions we don't like - and engage respectfully with those with whom we disagree. These values and other MIT practices meet or exceed many standards outlined in the document you sent. We freely choose these values because they're right, and we live by them because they support our mission - work of immense value to the prosperity, competitiveness, health and security of the United States. And of course, MIT abides by the law. The document also includes principles with which we disagree, including those that would restrict freedom of expression and our independence as an institution. And fundamentally, the premise of the document is inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone. In our view, America's leadership in science and innovation depends on independent thinking and open competition for excellence. In that free marketplace of ideas, the people of MIT gladly compete with the very best, without preferences. Therefore, with respect, we cannot support the proposed approach to addressing the issues facing higher education. As you know, MIT's record of service to the nation is long and enduring. Eight decades ago, MIT leaders helped invent a scientific partnership between America's research universities and the U.S. government that has delivered extraordinary benefits for the American people. We continue to believe in the power of this partnership to serve the nation. Sincerely, Sally Kornbluth
7 350 1.1K
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
Trump 2.0:
a personalist regime

see @donmoyn.bsky.social’s analysis
1 9 59
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
My 1st nominee for a weekly mini-Nobel Peace Prize:

Eboni Watson, the Chicago woman who stood up to & questioned DHS agents who in the middle of the night detained every resident of an apartment building in her South Shore neighborhood.

Who would you nominate?
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 4d
Eboni (Ebony?) Watson sure sounds like a hero:

‘As Watson questioned agents about warrants and the legality of their raid, neighbors pleaded with her to be quiet for her own safety. She refused to back down.
"You claim you have warrants, but do you have a warrant to seize the entire building?”’
Eboni Watson, a neighborhood resident who filmed the hours-long raid of the apartment building, told the Weekly she had just gone to bed and closed her eyes when she heard a loud 'bang', followed by the distinct buzzing of drones, a sound she had come to recognize after noticing them hovering near her home for the past three or four weeks. A moment later, Watson's phone lit up with a notification from the Citizen app that said there'd been a car accident outside. The buzzing grew louder. She grabbed the phone and got out of bed to look out the window. southsideweekly.com As Watson questioned agents about warrants and the legality of their raid, neighbors pleaded with her to be quiet for her own safety. She refused to back down. "You claim you have warrants, but do you have a warrant to seize the entire building?" she asked the agents. "Do you have warrants to detain the entire building?" According to Watson, two federal agents told her that they were taking all detainees' photos to check them against databases for visas or warrants. When Watson walked around the block to capture footage of the ongoing raid, she noticed federal agents were using the parking lots of Excel South Shore Academy—a CPS contractor school-to load residents into vans. In them, Watson saw Black U.S. citizens, women, and children. Grabbed from their beds, they hadn't been allowed to dress themselves before they were zip-tied and brought down to the waiting vans.
3 10
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 2d
The Nobel Peace Prize Committee is right:
“it is crucial to recognise courageous defenders of freedom who rise and resist.”

Every week
— perhaps every day (?) —
we should recognize a hero who is courageously defending freedom against authoritarianism.

Elevate their stories.
THE NOBEL PRIZE When authoritarians seize power, it is crucial to recognise courageous defenders of freedom who rise and resist. Democracy depends on people who refuse to stay silent, who dare to step forward despite grave risk, and who remind us that freedom must never be taken for granted, but must always be defended - with words, with courage and with determination. source: https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2025/press-release/
1 6 24
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 3d
“Fearing retaliation, the woman later withdrew a complaint”

IOW:
she feared that
the man Trump nominated to head the office charged with protecting whistleblowers from retaliation
would retaliate against her
for blowing the whistle on him

www.politico.com/news/2025/10...
POLITICO Trump watchdog pick faces scrutiny after hotel incident with female colleague Paul Ingrassia has been investigated for allegedly harassing a lower-ranking colleague, according to administration officials. Fearing retaliation, the woman later withdrew a complaint, and Ingrassia denied wrongdoing. Alex Brandon/AP By DANIEL LIPPMAN 10/09/2025 08:22 PM EDT Ingrassia's female colleague filed a human resources complaint against him before retracting it days later, fearing retaliation, according to three of the officials. However, five administration officials told POLITICO she complained to them that Ingrassia was making her feel uncomfortable and that it was hurting her ability to do her job.
1 20 58
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 3d
Pushback can work:

“After he drew publicity for ties to white supremacist Nick Fuentes and Andrew Tate … Ingrassia's July nomination hearing was indefinitely delayed.”

www.politico.com/news/2025/10...
= POLITICO In May, Trump nominated Ingrassia, who received his law degree in 2022, to head the Office of Special Counsel. After he drew publicity for ties to white supremacist Nick Fuentes and Andrew Tate - an influencer who has been charged in Britain with rape and human trafficking, which he denies — Ingrassia's July nomination hearing was indefinitely delayed. It was a rare instance of Senate Republicans pushing back on a Trump nominee.
3 7
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 3d
Pretty compelling argument by Abrego Garcia’s lawyers, no?
1 36
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 3d
Of course not:
“if these privileges could foreclose discovery in vindictive prosecution
cases, they would operate to do so in every case, by definition-the discovery is always into the
government's internal, deliberative process,conducted in anticipation of litigation, that led to
criminal charges”
More to the point, if these privileges could foreclose discovery in vindictive prosecution cases, they would operate to do so in every case, by definition-the discovery is always into the government's internal, deliberative process, conducted in anticipation of litigation, that led to criminal charges. See United States v. Adams, 870 F.2d 1140, 1146 (6th Cir. 1989) (ordering discovery into "whether the EEOC, acting on an improper motive, induced the Department of Justice to institute a prosecution that would not otherwise have been undertaken"); United States v. Zakhari, 85 F.4th 367, 383-84 (6th Cir. 2023) (remanding for a "searching inquiry," and "full development," into government's charging decision). The Court noted this precise language from Adams in its order granting discovery in this case. (Dkt. 138 at 11-12). In the ordinary course, the discovery called for in Adams and Zakhari would almost certainly be subject to the deliberative process privilege and the work product doctrine (and potentially other privileges) as a technical matter, but for the Court's order authorizing discovery of those materials. If the Adams panel thought that such documents would be protected from discovery, it would have said so. Likewise, in Zakhari, the Sixth Circuit ordered discovery into an allegedly vindictive charging decision discovery plainly implicating the very same privileges the government secks to assert here concluding that the government bore the burden of rebutting the presumption of vindictiveness with objective, on-the-record explanations, subject to defense testing. Zakhari, 85 F.4th at 383-84. The govemment's position that it can claim privilege to avoid such disclosures is wholly inconsistent with the holdings of Adams and Zakhari and would require the Court to abdicate any oversight, in favor of deferring to the government's word. But the law is precisely the opposite: as Judge Kethledge explained in Zakhari, "[i)he prosecution is entitled to no
1 40
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 3d
Trump has fired prosecutors because they were loyal to the law, replacing them with prosecutors who are blindly loyal to him

< paraphrasing Letitia James >
newyorkstateag.bsky.social
New York Attorney General Letitia James @newyorkstateag.bsky.social · 3d
This is nothing more than a continuation of the president’s desperate weaponization of our justice system.

I am not fearful — I am fearless.

We will fight these baseless charges aggressively, and my office will continue to fiercely protect New Yorkers and their rights..
2 8
Reposted by Kathleen Clark
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 3d
Looks like lying to federal judges has consequences
jonseidel.bsky.social
Jon Seidel @jonseidel.bsky.social · 3d
U.S. District Judge April Perry says it comes down to a "credibility determination."

"I simply cannot credit [the Trump administration's] declarations to the extent they contradict state and local law enforcement. … DHS' perception of events are simply unreliable."
jonseidel.bsky.social
Jon Seidel @jonseidel.bsky.social · 3d
#BREAKING A federal judge say she will grant "in part" a request by the state of Illinois for a temporary restraining order against the deployment of National Guard troops into the state.

U.S. District Judge April Perry is still ruling and has not outlined the details of her order.
7 19
kathleenclark.bsky.social
Kathleen Clark @kathleenclark.bsky.social · 3d
Looks like lying to federal judges has consequences
jonseidel.bsky.social
Jon Seidel @jonseidel.bsky.social · 3d
U.S. District Judge April Perry says it comes down to a "credibility determination."

"I simply cannot credit [the Trump administration's] declarations to the extent they contradict state and local law enforcement. … DHS' perception of events are simply unreliable."
jonseidel.bsky.social
Jon Seidel @jonseidel.bsky.social · 3d
#BREAKING A federal judge say she will grant "in part" a request by the state of Illinois for a temporary restraining order against the deployment of National Guard troops into the state.

U.S. District Judge April Perry is still ruling and has not outlined the details of her order.
7 19
Reposted by Kathleen Clark
jonseidel.bsky.social
Jon Seidel @jonseidel.bsky.social · 3d
Perry cites other fed prosecutions/lawsuits in Chicago and says "in the last 48 hours, in four separate unrelated legal decision from different neutral parties, they all cast significant doubt on DHS' credibility and assessment of what is happening on the streets of Chicago."
3 180 840