Lawfare No Bull Lawfare

On May 8, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Gen. Charles “CQ” Brown testified during a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense hearing on President Joe Biden’s 2025 Defense Budget Request. Several senators inquired about the Biden administration and Defense Department’s decision to pause the shipment of aid and weapons to Israel amidst the ongoing war in Gaza. Secretary Austin confirmed that  one shipment of “high-payload munitions” was paused as the department “re-evaluated some of the security assistance” that the U.S. was providing. In response to a number of questions, Austin asserted that the U.S.’s support for Israel remains “iron-clad.” Other topics were covered by the Committee, including deterrence, nuclear capabilities, border security, and more.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On April 25, 2024 the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in Trump v. United States, former President Trump's appeal of the D.C. Circuit's rejection of his claim that presidential immunity shields him from being prosecuted by special counsel Jack Smith for alleged attempts to subvert the outcomes of the 2020 presidential election. D. John Sauer represented Trump. Michael Dreeben represented the Justice Department. Oral argument began at 10am.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On February 12th, 2024, Judge Scott McAfee held a motions hearing in Fulton County Superior Court. The hearing centered on several motions to quash filed by individuals who received subpoenas to testify or produce documents ahead of an evidentiary hearing on whether district attorney Fani Willis should be disqualified from prosecuting Donald Trump and others. Judge McAfee did not immediately rule on the motions to quash.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Jan. 12, Israel delivered oral arguments rejecting South Africa’s claims of Israeli genocide in Gaza in the International Court of Justice (ICJ). In South Africa v. Israel, South Africa alleges that Israel’s conduct in the war in Gaza has violated the 1948 Convention Against Genocide. At this stage of the proceedings, South Africa seeks a directive, or “provisional measure,” from the ICJ that would order Israel to stop operations in Gaza on the basis that South Africa’s claims are plausible and that irreparable harm is possible if Israeli operations continue. 
Among other arguments, Israel’s representatives contend that the ICJ lacks jurisdiction, as there is no “dispute” over whether Israel has committed genocide; the standards of irreparable harm and urgency required to establish provisional measures are not satisfied, as Israel has taken pains to mitigate civilian harm by asking civilians to leave conflict areas and allowing substantial levels of humanitarian aid to pass into Gaza; and provisional measures halting Israeli operations would violate Israel’s inherent right to self-defense.


Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Jan. 11, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) held a public hearing in the case of South Africa v. Israel, on whether Israel is committing acts of genocide in Gaza. In its first public hearing of the case, the ICJ heard the South African legal delegation’s oral arguments, in which they alleged that Israel’s actions in Gaza have violated its obligations under the Genocide Convention of 1948. South Africa also argued that the court should grant the nine provisional measures requested in its complaint against Israel, including ordering the halt of Israeli military operations in the Gaza Strip while the case is ongoing.


Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Dec. 6, the Colorado Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the appeal of the Denver District Court decision that found that former President Donald Trump “engaged in insurrection” but could not be disqualified from primary and general election ballots in Colorado because of the language of Section 3. The arguments in front of the state supreme court centered on whether the presidency is an “office…under the United States,” whether the president is “an officer of the United States,” whether Trump engaged in insurrection, and how the issues may conflict with Trump’s First Amendment rights.  
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.