I'm using the edit function to add updates to this post but I don't know if that's a thing that's going to work. Is anyone seeing them? Is it reasonable to expect people to check for them? It seems like pinging people every time I want to add a small update is not a good alternative, so, looking for creative solutions. 🥹
Recognizing that I know more about fed income tax than social media, I tentatively raise my hand... At the end of the day (_your_ day), post on Twitter that the daily update is up on Substack and it's in the "Twitter v. Musk Spotlight" thread. At some point, folks have to make some effort on their own to follow along. A nightly tweet gets you out of the "my inbox is full of TCD updates" scenario, and it seems as if everyone's uncle is reading your Twitter timeline. So make it easy on yourself -- you deserve any break you take.
So flipping good. We live in a stupid era. Lots of fuzzy thinking and writing. Yet on Twitter v Musk we're getting an embarrassment of riches when it comes to clear thinking and clear writing. Right from the top: Chancellor McCormick is killing it. Whether Twitter or Musk is winning, McCormick is the runaway winner of this case so far. SCOTUS material.
Then Prof. Ann Lipton and Chancery Daily (hard to mention one without the other as they often play off of each other on Twitter) follow up with more lucidity. Such high quality -- and fun -- surrounded by so so much of the opposite. Thanks and keep up the good work! We might as well get this stuff right because legal scholars will be discussing these twists and turns decades from now.
Random thought that occurred to me: is it unusual to have remote/video conferences? I imagine courts everywhere are using the resources they have but with how FAST things keep moving, I feel like I’d be dizzy just trying to keep up with what motions are being heard in a particular hour, let alone trying to brief and file other things in the same case.
I would say the court does about 1/3 telephonic, 1/3 Zoom, 1/3 in-person hearings right now—in ascending likelihood based on their relative importance. Minor scheduling calls or other disputes are frequently via phone, some discovery disputes and other hearings are via Zoom, and most full-blown oral arguments are in-person, but the parties can agree to request Zoom (or be asked by the Court) and I've never seen the Court deny a party's request to hold the hearing remotely, in the aftermath of pandemic closures and everything going full-Zoom for many months.
I'm using the edit function to add updates to this post but I don't know if that's a thing that's going to work. Is anyone seeing them? Is it reasonable to expect people to check for them? It seems like pinging people every time I want to add a small update is not a good alternative, so, looking for creative solutions. 🥹
Recognizing that I know more about fed income tax than social media, I tentatively raise my hand... At the end of the day (_your_ day), post on Twitter that the daily update is up on Substack and it's in the "Twitter v. Musk Spotlight" thread. At some point, folks have to make some effort on their own to follow along. A nightly tweet gets you out of the "my inbox is full of TCD updates" scenario, and it seems as if everyone's uncle is reading your Twitter timeline. So make it easy on yourself -- you deserve any break you take.
This is a very sensible suggestion. Seconded.
So flipping good. We live in a stupid era. Lots of fuzzy thinking and writing. Yet on Twitter v Musk we're getting an embarrassment of riches when it comes to clear thinking and clear writing. Right from the top: Chancellor McCormick is killing it. Whether Twitter or Musk is winning, McCormick is the runaway winner of this case so far. SCOTUS material.
Then Prof. Ann Lipton and Chancery Daily (hard to mention one without the other as they often play off of each other on Twitter) follow up with more lucidity. Such high quality -- and fun -- surrounded by so so much of the opposite. Thanks and keep up the good work! We might as well get this stuff right because legal scholars will be discussing these twists and turns decades from now.
Random thought that occurred to me: is it unusual to have remote/video conferences? I imagine courts everywhere are using the resources they have but with how FAST things keep moving, I feel like I’d be dizzy just trying to keep up with what motions are being heard in a particular hour, let alone trying to brief and file other things in the same case.
I would say the court does about 1/3 telephonic, 1/3 Zoom, 1/3 in-person hearings right now—in ascending likelihood based on their relative importance. Minor scheduling calls or other disputes are frequently via phone, some discovery disputes and other hearings are via Zoom, and most full-blown oral arguments are in-person, but the parties can agree to request Zoom (or be asked by the Court) and I've never seen the Court deny a party's request to hold the hearing remotely, in the aftermath of pandemic closures and everything going full-Zoom for many months.