Christian Mott
@cjmott.bsky.social
Moral psychology & experimental jurisprudence. Interested in mental state attributions, risk, punishment, personal identity, criminal law & procedure, constitutional & statutory interpretation, statistics, etc., etc., etc. christianmott.com
Mahershala Ali as Blade, finally. Ryan Coogler writing and directing.
November 26, 2025 at 2:55 AM
Mahershala Ali as Blade, finally. Ryan Coogler writing and directing.
When I was a clerk, we had another clerk in chambers cite-check every opinion before circulation and we cite-checked every opinion we received for the side the judge decided to join. Even for solo opinions, this inaccurate quotation should have been caught in the in-chambers cite-check.
November 25, 2025 at 10:53 PM
When I was a clerk, we had another clerk in chambers cite-check every opinion before circulation and we cite-checked every opinion we received for the side the judge decided to join. Even for solo opinions, this inaccurate quotation should have been caught in the in-chambers cite-check.
At some point, that strategy would violate the Speedy Trial Clause or the Due Process Clause, regardless of the SoL, since the government's behavior would be tactical/harassing and would prejudice the defense. See Barker v. Wingo, 407 US 514, 531; US v. Marion, 404 U. S. 307, 325.
November 25, 2025 at 3:10 AM
At some point, that strategy would violate the Speedy Trial Clause or the Due Process Clause, regardless of the SoL, since the government's behavior would be tactical/harassing and would prejudice the defense. See Barker v. Wingo, 407 US 514, 531; US v. Marion, 404 U. S. 307, 325.
You see, the real DOGE was inside each of the other agencies all along.
November 24, 2025 at 5:36 PM
You see, the real DOGE was inside each of the other agencies all along.
If only SCOTUS had ruled that retired service members are not subject to the UCMJ for post-retirement conduct when @stevevladeck.bsky.social asked them to.
The Supreme Court and Military Jurisdiction Over Retired Servicemembers
www.lawfaremedia.org
November 24, 2025 at 5:21 PM
If only SCOTUS had ruled that retired service members are not subject to the UCMJ for post-retirement conduct when @stevevladeck.bsky.social asked them to.
Having a veto overridden would be a huge public embarrassment. If any of the files are damaging to Trump, it seems more likely that they will over-redact based on classification and the ongoing investigation and take their chances in court.
November 18, 2025 at 10:11 PM
Having a veto overridden would be a huge public embarrassment. If any of the files are damaging to Trump, it seems more likely that they will over-redact based on classification and the ongoing investigation and take their chances in court.
There must be some fraction of the GOP caucus that actually wants these files to be damaging for Trump, so they'd have more leeway to rein him in without angering the base.
November 18, 2025 at 9:15 PM
There must be some fraction of the GOP caucus that actually wants these files to be damaging for Trump, so they'd have more leeway to rein him in without angering the base.
He explained his vote in a twitter post.
Rep. Clay Higgins (@RepClayHiggins)
I have been a principled “NO” on this bill from the beginning. What was wrong with the bill three months ago is still wrong today. It abandons 250 years of criminal justice procedure in America. As wr...
xcancel.com
November 18, 2025 at 7:54 PM
He explained his vote in a twitter post.
CBS says Clay Higgins.
Epstein files live updates as House passes bill to force release of documents in 427-1 vote
The House voted 427 to 1 to approve the Epstein Files Transparency Act and compel the release of documents. Follow live updates here.
www.cbsnews.com
November 18, 2025 at 7:49 PM
CBS says Clay Higgins.
One Republican nay, so Johnson's vote counting struggles continue.
November 18, 2025 at 7:48 PM
One Republican nay, so Johnson's vote counting struggles continue.
Wow, Mike Johnson just "said on the House floor that he expects there to be a unanimous vote to pass" the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
Update from Annie Karni
www.nytimes.com
November 18, 2025 at 7:23 PM
Wow, Mike Johnson just "said on the House floor that he expects there to be a unanimous vote to pass" the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
I see, so it's more like a NIL right, rather than trademark under US law. That makes more sense.
November 18, 2025 at 6:32 PM
I see, so it's more like a NIL right, rather than trademark under US law. That makes more sense.
Glad this brief points out that religious classifications receive heightened scrutiny, even though religion is neither immutable nor ascertainable at birth, particularly for religious converts. Hard to square with Barrett's analysis. (Maybe she believes in such a robust 1A that she will give up EP?)
November 18, 2025 at 5:54 PM
Glad this brief points out that religious classifications receive heightened scrutiny, even though religion is neither immutable nor ascertainable at birth, particularly for religious converts. Hard to square with Barrett's analysis. (Maybe she believes in such a robust 1A that she will give up EP?)
Turns out he was a more avid hiker than we knew.
November 18, 2025 at 2:34 AM
Turns out he was a more avid hiker than we knew.
He's famous for hiking the Appalachian trail.
Mark Sanford extramarital affair - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
November 18, 2025 at 2:30 AM
He's famous for hiking the Appalachian trail.
These sound like the words of a man who learned that veto-proof majorities would vote to release the files in both the House and the Senate and wanted to make it look like it was his idea.
November 17, 2025 at 2:55 AM
These sound like the words of a man who learned that veto-proof majorities would vote to release the files in both the House and the Senate and wanted to make it look like it was his idea.
You might say she was charged and convicted *for* something she didn't do (i.e., supply a working Edison machine).
November 16, 2025 at 5:06 AM
You might say she was charged and convicted *for* something she didn't do (i.e., supply a working Edison machine).
Would only make a material difference if it's 71+ additional defections, since that majority would be veto-proof.
November 15, 2025 at 4:39 PM
Would only make a material difference if it's 71+ additional defections, since that majority would be veto-proof.
Based on his texts, it seems like he and Steve Bannon were developing some sort of filmed series where they would interview famous people and scientists (e.g., there are texts about filming discussions with Woody Allen and Noam Chomsky). Maybe this is a list of potential interviewees?
November 13, 2025 at 2:04 PM
Based on his texts, it seems like he and Steve Bannon were developing some sort of filmed series where they would interview famous people and scientists (e.g., there are texts about filming discussions with Woody Allen and Noam Chomsky). Maybe this is a list of potential interviewees?
Note that this email was sent on 11/23/2017, which was the day of Thanksgiving. Epstein's flight logs are consistent: They show that his plane went from NYC to West Palm Beach on 11/13/2017 and from West Palm Beach to the Virgin Island on 11/26/2017.
We compiled every known flight made by Jeffrey Epstein's fleet of private planes. Search them all for the first time.
Business Insider created a searchable dataset of every known flight made by Jeffrey Epstein's private jets between 1995 and 2019.
www.businessinsider.com
November 13, 2025 at 3:21 AM
Note that this email was sent on 11/23/2017, which was the day of Thanksgiving. Epstein's flight logs are consistent: They show that his plane went from NYC to West Palm Beach on 11/13/2017 and from West Palm Beach to the Virgin Island on 11/26/2017.
I think some people are assuming DOJ would have obtained many of the same emails during their investigations of Epstein. I have no idea if that's true, but it's fairly plausible.
That said, DOJ generally does not make public the evidence it has obtained outside the context of a legal proceeding.
That said, DOJ generally does not make public the evidence it has obtained outside the context of a legal proceeding.
November 13, 2025 at 1:48 AM
I think some people are assuming DOJ would have obtained many of the same emails during their investigations of Epstein. I have no idea if that's true, but it's fairly plausible.
That said, DOJ generally does not make public the evidence it has obtained outside the context of a legal proceeding.
That said, DOJ generally does not make public the evidence it has obtained outside the context of a legal proceeding.
One wonders if today's document release was intended to pressure signers not to defect.
November 12, 2025 at 5:18 PM
One wonders if today's document release was intended to pressure signers not to defect.