Tessera
Folgen

Allison Marsh

@mamafoo2000.bsky.social

This Life. This Moment. Women's rights are human rights. LGBTQ+ rights are human rights. IG: Mamafoo2000

4143 Posts3394 Follower1675 Folgt
Some Random Susan@anysusan.bsky.social · 2h ago

There are still some lucky people out there who have never been entangled in a relationship with a malignant narcissist and don’t understand what drives people to support them. This anecdote about Pirro and Burgum is illustrative. Trump carefully curates his cabal of people who compete for approval

[Excerpt of transcript from The Daily Blast podcast from The New Republic, Featuring host Greg Sargent and guest firmer federal prosecutor Barbara McQuade ] Sargent: I want to bring up something that Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said about this thing, because I think it really gets at the corrupt nature of it. After Piro dropped this case, Burgum went out on Twitter and contested her dropping it. He said, "the evidence is clear, vandals have repeatedly caused damage to the Reflecting Pool. We provided the U.S. Attorney's office with expert and eyewitness testimony," et cetera, et cetera, right? What drives me crazy about that is Burgum, who is not Trump and presumably not crazy the way Trump is, is willing to attack Piro for the act of following the facts and the law, and willing to attack Piro for not putting Trump above those considerations of facts and law. Trump's lackeys will sell each other out for a tiny bit of good favor from the despot. And of course that's always fleeting, and it'll be followed by him turning on them at some point anyway. You can kind of see how the corruption seeps down from the top in that one Doug Burgum tweet.
Allison Marsh@mamafoo2000.bsky.social · 7h ago

Amazing legal work being done. Thankful for the legal mind and tireless spirit of @joycewhitevance.bsky.social keeping us educated and informed! open.substack.com/pub/joycevan...

Trump's Executive Order on Voting: Blue State Attorneys General, and Some Retired Judges, Weigh In

Sunday night in The Week Ahead post, we discussed the Trump administration’s effort to push ahead with implementation of an executive order that would give the federal government greater control over ...

open.substack.com

Naomi Baker@drnaomibaker.bsky.social · 2d ago

Today I discovered that a letter attributed to a man was actually written by Ann Bathurst, the 17th-century visionary woman I’m researching. 🤩 Archival work might be slow and painstaking but it’s totally thrilling to be going in search of lost voices from the past and finding them! 📚

Bild
Allison Gill@muellershewrote.com · 2d ago

FYI: Blanche rescinded the ORDER establishing the slush fund, not the underlying “settlement.” The settlement says any changes must be agreed to by ALL parties, not just Todd. This “rescission” isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.

Bild
Chris Geidner@chrisgeidner.bsky.social · 4d ago

UPDATE: Judge Pitts denied DOJ's request for a stay in the Packard (Stanford) grand jury subpoena case. Patient records remain protected. Not only did Pitts deny the stay request, he also "conclude[d] that DOJ lacks evidence to support its claimed interest or to demonstrate irreparable harm ...."

In its motion for a stay, DOJ argues that grand jury secrecy requirements under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) preclude it from offering any evidence to demonstrate its lawful and legitimate interest in provisional class members' sensitive medical information. But as the Court explained almost one month ago, "[t]hat is not quite true. It is within DOJ's authority to petition the Texas court for authorization to disclose grand jury matters in connection with this 2 Case 5:26-cv-04998-PCP Document 108 Filed 07/31/26 Page 3 of 4 proceeding." Id. at *21 (citing Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(3)(E)(i)). The Court invited DOJ to seek such authorization and to "request that this Court review any materials in camera as needed to preserve grand jury secrecy." Id. More than four weeks later, DOJ appears to have taken no action. DOJ could have used its reply in support of its stay motion (if not the stay motion itself) to identify evidence of its legitimate interest in provisional class members' medical information or, at the least, to apprise the Court of its efforts to seek authorization to disclose such evidence. Instead, DOJ opted not to file any reply at all. The Court must therefore conclude that DOJ lacks evidence to support its claimed interest or to demonstrate irreparable harm to that interest as a result of the preliminary injunction.
Allison Marsh@mamafoo2000.bsky.social · 3d ago

@joycewhitevance.bsky.social you have been my rock with your (seemingly) indefatiguable legal interpretations and astute commentary on the assaults to democracy that occur on a daily basis. The work, for you, is subtractive, but it's additive in my life. 🫶💯🫶 open.substack.com/pub/joycevan...

Saturday Night

I am taking time today with friends and family after a long week full of an overwhelming amount of news on the democracy front.

open.substack.com