Ian
@ianphipps.bsky.social
J.D., Con law enjoyer. Joe Mazzula and Jaylen Brown defender.
Really nice piece of resistance to the many farcical lawsuits created by Trump. And good for the judge sticking up for judicial integrity. The Court’s cite and discussion of Slaughter is on point and uses unitary executive against Trump. Very cool.
Opinion and order: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
#106 in Trump v. Internal Revenue Service (S.D. Fla., 1:26-cv-20609) – CourtListener.com
ORDER. See attached document for full details. Signed by Judge Kathleen M. Williams on 7/13/2026. (ah06) (Entered: 07/13/2026)
storage.courtlistener.com
July 13, 2026 at 6:12 PM
Really nice piece of resistance to the many farcical lawsuits created by Trump. And good for the judge sticking up for judicial integrity. The Court’s cite and discussion of Slaughter is on point and uses unitary executive against Trump. Very cool.
Reposted by Ian
Slaughter is an earthquake: SCOTUS has overturned a 90-year-old precedent that facilitated much of modern governance by granting many agencies meaningful independence from the president. Now SCOTUS crushes that independence ... for seemingly every agency except the Federal Reserve.
June 29, 2026 at 2:19 PM
Slaughter is an earthquake: SCOTUS has overturned a 90-year-old precedent that facilitated much of modern governance by granting many agencies meaningful independence from the president. Now SCOTUS crushes that independence ... for seemingly every agency except the Federal Reserve.
Reposted by Ian
Yesterday's 6–3 Supreme Court order ushering in a racist Alabama gerrymander broke two promises that Alito made *12 days earlier* in Callais and shamelessly broke the court's own (bogus) rule against late intervention in an ongoing election. slate.com/news-and-pol...
The Supreme Court Just Made Its Awful Voting Rights Decision So Much Worse
SCOTUS rushed out Monday’s decision on an expedited basis, presumably so Alabama would have enough time to enact its new gerrymander before the midterms.
slate.com
May 12, 2026 at 6:28 PM
Yesterday's 6–3 Supreme Court order ushering in a racist Alabama gerrymander broke two promises that Alito made *12 days earlier* in Callais and shamelessly broke the court's own (bogus) rule against late intervention in an ongoing election. slate.com/news-and-pol...
Reposted by Ian
I'm grateful that Kyle surfaced all these extraordinary opinions slamming the Trump administration for the illegal detention of immigrants. This one leaps out in part because the judge is warning us that abuses being inflicted on immigrants now are a preview of what could be unleashed on citizens.
February 10, 2026 at 4:30 PM
I'm grateful that Kyle surfaced all these extraordinary opinions slamming the Trump administration for the illegal detention of immigrants. This one leaps out in part because the judge is warning us that abuses being inflicted on immigrants now are a preview of what could be unleashed on citizens.
Reposted by Ian
Another memorable ruling out of West Virginia, where Judge Goodwin — a Clinton appointee — excoriates the treatment of ICE detainees.
"This is not what civil enforcement looks like in a humane system of government under law."
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
"This is not what civil enforcement looks like in a humane system of government under law."
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
February 11, 2026 at 3:11 AM
Another memorable ruling out of West Virginia, where Judge Goodwin — a Clinton appointee — excoriates the treatment of ICE detainees.
"This is not what civil enforcement looks like in a humane system of government under law."
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
"This is not what civil enforcement looks like in a humane system of government under law."
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
Reposted by Ian
this is a good one storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
February 3, 2026 at 12:57 AM
this is a good one storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
Very interesting there is no discussion on why plaintiffs have rebutted the presumption of regularity, only that they have. Would have been nice to show the analysis for other cases.
JUST IN: Judge Tostrud lifts restraining order against Trump administraiton, concluding they're unlikely to destroy or alter evidence related to the Pretti shooting -- though he says the record is "not one-sided." storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
February 2, 2026 at 10:53 PM
Very interesting there is no discussion on why plaintiffs have rebutted the presumption of regularity, only that they have. Would have been nice to show the analysis for other cases.
Reposted by Ian
Ellison: "We have the right as a state, as a co-sovereign, to do our own business with our own tax money. What the federal govt has said is, 'if you don't do it our way, we're gonna saturate your state with 4,000 ICE agents until you cry uncle and obey us.' That's unconstitutional and illegal."
January 27, 2026 at 3:08 PM
Ellison: "We have the right as a state, as a co-sovereign, to do our own business with our own tax money. What the federal govt has said is, 'if you don't do it our way, we're gonna saturate your state with 4,000 ICE agents until you cry uncle and obey us.' That's unconstitutional and illegal."
Reposted by Ian
BREAKING: The National Basketball Players Association issues statement on ICE killings in Minnesota.
“[W]e refuse to let the flames of division threaten the civil liberties that are meant to protect us all.”
“[W]e refuse to let the flames of division threaten the civil liberties that are meant to protect us all.”
January 25, 2026 at 9:07 PM
BREAKING: The National Basketball Players Association issues statement on ICE killings in Minnesota.
“[W]e refuse to let the flames of division threaten the civil liberties that are meant to protect us all.”
“[W]e refuse to let the flames of division threaten the civil liberties that are meant to protect us all.”
Is this not the easiest (to prove) and most expansive Monell claim to have ever existed?
This DHS memorandum says that the DHS General Counsel's office has adopted a new position that the Fourth Amendment allows entry into the home to make an arrest just based on an administrative warrant.
I would like to see that argument.
documentcloud.org/documents/26...
I would like to see that argument.
documentcloud.org/documents/26...
January 25, 2026 at 6:08 AM
Is this not the easiest (to prove) and most expansive Monell claim to have ever existed?
These federal goons are the most evil people in our society, and Congress gave them weapons and a blank check. This will stain our County and history for generations.
Another ruling just yesterday in Minnesota: A federal judge calls it "particularly craven" that ICE transfered "a nursing refugee mother" out of state. Ta Eh Doh Lah was admitted as a refugee from Myanmar in 2024, has no criminal history and a 5-month-old. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
January 25, 2026 at 6:03 AM
These federal goons are the most evil people in our society, and Congress gave them weapons and a blank check. This will stain our County and history for generations.
Wow
Since July, I've tracked at least 2,300 cases in which federal judges have ruled ICE has illegally detained people without bond or due process.
This is one that stands out:
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
This is one that stands out:
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
January 25, 2026 at 5:58 AM
Wow
Reposted by Ian
If you saw this happening in another country, what would you call it?
[Cartoon by Mike Luckovich]
[Cartoon by Mike Luckovich]
January 23, 2026 at 5:17 PM
If you saw this happening in another country, what would you call it?
[Cartoon by Mike Luckovich]
[Cartoon by Mike Luckovich]
Reposted by Ian
AOC: This is quite a bit of market concentration. Agreed?
CVS HEALTH CHAIR DAVID JOYNER: No. I'd suggest it's a model that works well for the consumer
AOC: It works well for CVS. Health insurance gets a cut, pharmacy benefit manager gets one, drug manufacturer gets one, & the patient gets screwed
CVS HEALTH CHAIR DAVID JOYNER: No. I'd suggest it's a model that works well for the consumer
AOC: It works well for CVS. Health insurance gets a cut, pharmacy benefit manager gets one, drug manufacturer gets one, & the patient gets screwed
January 22, 2026 at 5:48 PM
AOC: This is quite a bit of market concentration. Agreed?
CVS HEALTH CHAIR DAVID JOYNER: No. I'd suggest it's a model that works well for the consumer
AOC: It works well for CVS. Health insurance gets a cut, pharmacy benefit manager gets one, drug manufacturer gets one, & the patient gets screwed
CVS HEALTH CHAIR DAVID JOYNER: No. I'd suggest it's a model that works well for the consumer
AOC: It works well for CVS. Health insurance gets a cut, pharmacy benefit manager gets one, drug manufacturer gets one, & the patient gets screwed
Reposted by Ian
The Supreme Court only cleared the way for Kavanaugh Stops four months ago and ICE now openly engages in violent racial profiling, snatching anyone who looks non-white and treating them as presumptively guilty of a crime. Remarkable how quickly our liberties can be crushed when courts go along.
Can confirm I have personally seen three attempts just today of agents in a convoy of ICE vehicles trying to snatch random POCs along Central Ave - and then being chased off by neighbors with whistles. It's blatant racial profiling.
Minneapolis city council member says POC should stay home:
Minneapolis city council member says POC should stay home:
Dear neighbor,
HIGH ALERT‼️ If you are vulnerable to deportation please stay home today. I’m sorry to say this but it’s not safe to be outside. ICE is tearing families apart.
Children of immigrants please keep your family safe.
Jason Chavez 1/
HIGH ALERT‼️ If you are vulnerable to deportation please stay home today. I’m sorry to say this but it’s not safe to be outside. ICE is tearing families apart.
Children of immigrants please keep your family safe.
Jason Chavez 1/
January 14, 2026 at 4:29 PM
The Supreme Court only cleared the way for Kavanaugh Stops four months ago and ICE now openly engages in violent racial profiling, snatching anyone who looks non-white and treating them as presumptively guilty of a crime. Remarkable how quickly our liberties can be crushed when courts go along.
What's really noticeable about this case to me, is that the phrase "injury in fact" does not appear in the majority or concurrence, only in the dissent.
Roberts did not even try to lay a foundation based in the court's standing precedent to justify the new rule.
Roberts did not even try to lay a foundation based in the court's standing precedent to justify the new rule.
In dissent, Jackson (joined by Sotomayor) basically says: Why are we making it easier for Republicans to challenge vote-counting rules and other election laws while making it harder for normal people to get their cases heard in federal court? www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...
![I am all for simplifying our standing law. See ante, at 10.
But I am against doing so selectively; either Article III
standing requires an actual or imminent injury in fact that
is particularized to the plaintiff, or it does not. Bost has
plainly failed to allege facts that support an inference of
standing under our established precedents. By carving out
a bespoke rule for candidate-plaintiffs—granting them
standing “to challenge the rules that govern the counting of
votes,” simply and solely because they are “candidate[s]” for
office, ibid.—the Court now complicates and destabilizes
both our standing law and America’s electoral processes.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreiganrqodm566pnglhzdsv7qi5z6sotx6m4a6ickov757jo6ia4hpi)
January 14, 2026 at 4:35 PM
What's really noticeable about this case to me, is that the phrase "injury in fact" does not appear in the majority or concurrence, only in the dissent.
Roberts did not even try to lay a foundation based in the court's standing precedent to justify the new rule.
Roberts did not even try to lay a foundation based in the court's standing precedent to justify the new rule.
Reposted by Ian
BREAKING: Minnesota, Minneapolis, and St. Paul sue Noem and others over DHS immigration enforcement surge in Minnesota, seeking TRO to block the surge and stop unlawful actions detailed in the complaint.
January 12, 2026 at 9:56 PM
BREAKING: Minnesota, Minneapolis, and St. Paul sue Noem and others over DHS immigration enforcement surge in Minnesota, seeking TRO to block the surge and stop unlawful actions detailed in the complaint.
This is the Kavanaugh stop in action.
Supreme Court sanctioned racial profiling has enabled us to fall into a police state where you can be held indefinitely for having dark skin or speaking a language different than English.
Supreme Court sanctioned racial profiling has enabled us to fall into a police state where you can be held indefinitely for having dark skin or speaking a language different than English.
It is brazenly illegal to detain people based on the color of their skin for "status review." Yet under Kristi Noem, this is precisely what ICE and CBP are doing. They do not even make a pretense of behaving within the law.
January 12, 2026 at 6:30 PM
This is the Kavanaugh stop in action.
Supreme Court sanctioned racial profiling has enabled us to fall into a police state where you can be held indefinitely for having dark skin or speaking a language different than English.
Supreme Court sanctioned racial profiling has enabled us to fall into a police state where you can be held indefinitely for having dark skin or speaking a language different than English.
2 things about this settlement I am curious about:
1. If it complies with BBB, which set out a plan to phase out SAVE by 2028. A conflict with Congress’ express wishes could be a ripe ground to block this abrupt end to SAVE.
2. Does a settlement like this comply with the APA? @aft.org
1. If it complies with BBB, which set out a plan to phase out SAVE by 2028. A conflict with Congress’ express wishes could be a ripe ground to block this abrupt end to SAVE.
2. Does a settlement like this comply with the APA? @aft.org
ED is jointly proposing a settlement with the state of Missouri that would end the Biden administration's SAVE student loan repayment plan. It's yet another example of agreements between friendly parties replacing traditional lawsuits.
U.S. Department of Education Announces Agreement with Missouri to End Biden Administration’s Illegal SAVE Plan
ED announced a proposed joint settlement agreement with the State of Missouri that would end the Biden Administration’s illegal ‘Saving on a Valuable Education’ (SAVE) Plan.
www.ed.gov
December 9, 2025 at 6:07 PM
2 things about this settlement I am curious about:
1. If it complies with BBB, which set out a plan to phase out SAVE by 2028. A conflict with Congress’ express wishes could be a ripe ground to block this abrupt end to SAVE.
2. Does a settlement like this comply with the APA? @aft.org
1. If it complies with BBB, which set out a plan to phase out SAVE by 2028. A conflict with Congress’ express wishes could be a ripe ground to block this abrupt end to SAVE.
2. Does a settlement like this comply with the APA? @aft.org
I was sworn in as an Attorney today. An experience I won’t ever forget, signing the rolls and taking the Constitutional oath before massive portraits of our founders in Boston’s Faneuil Hall.
November 19, 2025 at 11:01 PM
I was sworn in as an Attorney today. An experience I won’t ever forget, signing the rolls and taking the Constitutional oath before massive portraits of our founders in Boston’s Faneuil Hall.
Reposted by Ian
Washington Supreme Court Justice Mungia has an extraordinary opinion condemning "the underlying racism and prejudices that are woven into the very fabric" of SCOTUS opinions about Native people.
"We must clearly, loudly, and unequivocally state that was wrong.”
www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf...
"We must clearly, loudly, and unequivocally state that was wrong.”
www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf...
![Returning to Cherokee Nation, Justice William Johnson’s separate opinion was
less tempered in how he considered the various Native American tribes:
I cannot but think that there are strong reasons for doubting the
applicability of the epithet state, to a people so low in the grade of
organized society as our Indian tribes most generally are.
Cherokee Nation, 30 U.S. at 21. Native Americans were not to be treated as “equals to
equals” but, instead, the United States was the conqueror and Native Americans the
conquered. Id. at 23.
In discussing Native Americans, Justice Johnson employed another racist trope
used by judges both before and after him: Native Americans were uncivilized savages.
[W]e have extended to them the means and inducement to become
agricultural and civilized. . . . Independently of the general influence of
humanity, these people were restless, warlike, and signally cruel.
. . . .
But I think it very clear that the constitution neither speaks of them as states
or foreign states, but as just what they were, Indian tribes . . . which the law
of nations would regard as nothing more than wandering hordes, held
together only by ties of blood and habit, and having neither laws or
government, beyond what is required in a savage state.
Id. at 23, 27-28.
This same characterization was used by Justice Stanley Matthews in Ex parte KanGi-Shun-Ca (otherwise known as Crow Dog), 109 U.S. 556, 3 S. Ct. 396, 27 L. Ed. 1030
(1883). Justice Matthews described Native Americans as leading a savage life.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:6h7b2i6ttw3l4t7pvbvxdith/bafkreih4usl4xndm4j7udmsbopzsbha4zznbk6ahlemijsxfj77lchvjpy)
October 10, 2025 at 5:29 PM
Washington Supreme Court Justice Mungia has an extraordinary opinion condemning "the underlying racism and prejudices that are woven into the very fabric" of SCOTUS opinions about Native people.
"We must clearly, loudly, and unequivocally state that was wrong.”
www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf...
"We must clearly, loudly, and unequivocally state that was wrong.”
www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf...
And she is right. They do not write opinions because there is rarely legal precedent or sufficiency for their rulings.
As for this case specifically: It is completely unreasonable to conclude that the balance of equities could ever favor the government when the plaintiffs face forced relocation.
As for this case specifically: It is completely unreasonable to conclude that the balance of equities could ever favor the government when the plaintiffs face forced relocation.
Justice Jackson's sharp dissent accuses her Republican-appointed colleagues of abusing the court's shadow docket "to allow this Administration to disrupt as many lives as possible, as quickly as possible." She also takes a dig at their refusal to write opinions explaining their actions.
October 3, 2025 at 8:47 PM
And she is right. They do not write opinions because there is rarely legal precedent or sufficiency for their rulings.
As for this case specifically: It is completely unreasonable to conclude that the balance of equities could ever favor the government when the plaintiffs face forced relocation.
As for this case specifically: It is completely unreasonable to conclude that the balance of equities could ever favor the government when the plaintiffs face forced relocation.
Reposted by Ian
BREAKING: Judge William Young finds that Noem, Rubio, DHS, and State "deliberately" sought to restrict non-citizens' First Amendment rights.
"'No law' means 'no law.' The First Amendment does not draw President Trump’s invidious distinction ...."
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
"'No law' means 'no law.' The First Amendment does not draw President Trump’s invidious distinction ...."
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
September 30, 2025 at 5:18 PM
BREAKING: Judge William Young finds that Noem, Rubio, DHS, and State "deliberately" sought to restrict non-citizens' First Amendment rights.
"'No law' means 'no law.' The First Amendment does not draw President Trump’s invidious distinction ...."
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
"'No law' means 'no law.' The First Amendment does not draw President Trump’s invidious distinction ...."
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
Just as important: the judge explicitly says the Executive branch is removing people outside of the country quicker than the legal system can react. People are being disappeared to countries where they previously faced torture and abuse when they know a court will stop them.
JUST IN: A judge concludes the Trump administration sent a man to Mexico to sidestep protections against torture.
He has no criminal history and had legal protection from being sent to his native El Salvador — where it appears Mexico is sending him. www.documentcloud.org/documents/26...
He has no criminal history and had legal protection from being sent to his native El Salvador — where it appears Mexico is sending him. www.documentcloud.org/documents/26...
September 28, 2025 at 9:47 PM
Just as important: the judge explicitly says the Executive branch is removing people outside of the country quicker than the legal system can react. People are being disappeared to countries where they previously faced torture and abuse when they know a court will stop them.
Reposted by Ian
They just tear-gassed us. They tried to run us over in a van holding a peaceful protester. They shot us with pepper balls. They dragged another protester into the facility.
moments ago, ice agents again came out of the broadview detention/“professing” facility to escort a silver suv out of the lot.
one of the agents picked up and threw congressional candidate kat abughazaleh to the ground.
one of the agents picked up and threw congressional candidate kat abughazaleh to the ground.
September 19, 2025 at 1:54 PM
They just tear-gassed us. They tried to run us over in a van holding a peaceful protester. They shot us with pepper balls. They dragged another protester into the facility.