Ben Cooper QC for @BluskyeAllison arguing against redactions.
#AllisonBailey
We are today attending the virtual hearing for #AllisonBailey’s claim against Stonewall & Garden Court Chambers.
Ben Cooper QC for @BluskyeAllison arguing against redactions.
#AllisonBailey
Ben Cooper trying to establish communications between individuals at Stonewall & individuals at Garden Court Chambers. Arguing names of individuals is relevant and they put in public domain.
Ben Cooper QC discussing individuals who had made complaints to Garden Court Chambers. Discussion is can these individuals be publicly named or should they be redacted in papers. These individuals have connections with Stonewall.
Robin Moira White confirming that the three individuals under discussion ARE members of Stonewall’s trans advisory group. They have assisted Stonewall but are not employees. RMW saying their names should not be public domain.
Ben Cooper QC these individuals roles are important. It’s not normal to redact names. There is a public interest in public justice.
Ben Cooper QC and Robin Moira White making final points.
Judge Stout talking about importance of open justice.
Judge Stout: For this hearing only I have decided that the three individuals will remain redacted
Judge Stout: Stonewall has not produced evidence to show that principal of open justice should be discarded. If this was a full hearing my judgement would be different.
Judge Stout: If their names were made public their article 8 rights would be impacted. Order of redaction only for this hearing. May be different at full hearing.
Ben Cooper QC: Only this week has claimant received application to strike out. Disclosure has yet to be completed. Some things are still redacted which shouldn’t be.
Ben Cooper QC: I can’t begin to embark on cross examination in a hearing of this kind. There isn’t the time. It would be a 2-3 day exercise. Please rule she can’t be called at this time.
Anthony Johnston: Claimant has still not named those she accuses of discrimination/victimisation. Do these individuals have authority to act for chambers. Wants Miss Khan called.
Judge Stout: I don’t think calling Miss Khan and having her cross examined would assist me in what I need to decide on today.
Judge Stout: There would not be a fair opportunity to test Miss Khan’s evidence today. Disclosure has not been completed. Application to call Miss Khan today denied.
Ben Cooper QC: Until disclosure has been completed it may not be possible for claimant to set out all protagonists.
Ben Cooper QC: This hearing is about whether the core pleaded statements have more than no chance of success.
Still discussing the fact that claimant has not named individuals who discriminated at this stage (unable to name all individuals without disclosure being completed).
Sound still intermittent.
Ben Cooper QC talking about collective action of the chambers against the claimant (@BluskyeAllison), withholding work during 2019.
Ben Cooper QC: Gender critical beliefs held/expressed by claimant are those held by a women’s movement of female feminists. Indirect discrimination on grounds of sex, also on grounds of sexual orientation, many that hold these beliefs are lesbians.
Ben Cooper QC: Did Stonewall induce, instruct or cause the discrimination against the claimant?
Ben Cooper QC: I will be demonstrating this case is way beyond the strikeout threshold.
Ben Cooper QC is reading from an email sent by @BluskyeAllison in December 2018 objecting to Garden Court Chambers association with Stonewall due to them breaching Equality Act.
Ben Cooper QC: reading from redacted email, only person named from chambers at this stage is Michelle Brewer
Ben Cooper QC: It is the claimants case that through the membership of the Stonewall diversity champion programme, Stonewall enforced its views on Garden Court Chambers
Ben Cooper QC going through claimants loss of earnings since openly expressing gender critical views
Ben Cooper QC: Stephen Lui (SP?) is the Barrister who was liaising with Stonewall re what Garden Court Chambers could offer re Stonewall Diversity Champions scheme.
Ben Cooper QC showing evidence that Michelle Brewer was acting in a Garden Court Chambers capacity and not an individual practitioner capacity.
Ben Cooper QC speaking about WhatsApp messages discussing claimant, can see which is Michelle Brewer but not who all others are. Language towards claimant @BluskyeAllison is described as ‘fruity’
Judge Stout asking if employees of Garden Court Chambers (in the marketing department?) have been redacted.
Ongoing discussion between Ben Cooper QC and Judge Stout re who are the redacted individuals in Michelle Brewers text/WhatsApp messages. Are they members of Garden Court Chambers?
Ben Cooper QC explains that #TERF is a derogatory term used to describe someone with claimants (@BluskyeAllison’s) beliefs
Ben Cooper QC: plainly nonsense, as can be seen from texts, that Garden Court Chambers didn’t realise that putting out a tweet was ‘making a public statement’
Discussion re how longer different counsels will need to speak for. Who will we hear from this afternoon and who tomorrow.
Breaking for lunch. Will resume at 2.
More from Law
In the cold light of morning, I'm still completely amazed by the legal belly flop that @ThomasMoreSoc filed in the DC District Court. It's the legal equivalent of watching the butt fumble, live
EVERYTHING you could possibly get wrong in a complaint, they managed
Start with the plaintiffs. The ONLY claims in the lawsuit are that the Constitution gives state legislatures the right to set the manner of elections, which they have allegedly (we'll get to this insanity) failed to do.
There's oodles of caselaw saying "since that's a right of the state legislature, only state legislatures, as a body, can bring such a claim"
Are the plaintiffs state legislatures?
https://t.co/KJGEvm8Owp
OK, what about the Defendants? They've sued Defendants from, IIRC, five states (GA, PA, WI, MI, AZ) based on claims that the State Legislatures there didn't pass election rules that the plaintiffs insist the Constitution requires (I promise, we'll get there).
EVERYTHING you could possibly get wrong in a complaint, they managed
Start with the plaintiffs. The ONLY claims in the lawsuit are that the Constitution gives state legislatures the right to set the manner of elections, which they have allegedly (we'll get to this insanity) failed to do.
There's oodles of caselaw saying "since that's a right of the state legislature, only state legislatures, as a body, can bring such a claim"
Are the plaintiffs state legislatures?
https://t.co/KJGEvm8Owp
OK, what about the Defendants? They've sued Defendants from, IIRC, five states (GA, PA, WI, MI, AZ) based on claims that the State Legislatures there didn't pass election rules that the plaintiffs insist the Constitution requires (I promise, we'll get there).
One of the judges this story mentions is William Cassidy, who was promoted from an Atlanta IJ position to a BIA member position in 2019 by the Trump DOJ. Cassidy has an awful history that has been well-documented, but I'm still enraged reading this reporting.
The story notes that the EOIR Director served as an ICE attorney in Atlanta and practiced before Cassidy for years. And it points to FOIA records unearthed by Bryan Johnson showing they remain friendly.
A trove of complaints against Cassidy was published by AILA in 2019 after FOIA litigation. They generally show misconduct, substantiated in the record, followed by "written counseling" etc.
One way Cassidy could avoid discipline is by turning off the recording device during the hearing. If he made a lewd or offensive comment off the record, all the EOIR would do is listen to the recording. If it's not there, the complaint is "unsubstantiated" https://t.co/wUeBPEEbpV
In that case, Cassidy joked about a detained immigrant saying he missed his wife. The complaint was dismissed because the ACIJ found "no levity or joking" in the comment.
\U0001f6a8New investigation: \U0001f6a8
— Tal Kopan (@TalKopan) January 22, 2021
How sexual harassment and misconduct has been allowed to flourish in the immigration courts, a system intended to give immigrants a fair chance to stay in the U.S.:https://t.co/Lw8hpK5jSe
The story notes that the EOIR Director served as an ICE attorney in Atlanta and practiced before Cassidy for years. And it points to FOIA records unearthed by Bryan Johnson showing they remain friendly.
A trove of complaints against Cassidy was published by AILA in 2019 after FOIA litigation. They generally show misconduct, substantiated in the record, followed by "written counseling" etc.
One way Cassidy could avoid discipline is by turning off the recording device during the hearing. If he made a lewd or offensive comment off the record, all the EOIR would do is listen to the recording. If it's not there, the complaint is "unsubstantiated" https://t.co/wUeBPEEbpV
In that case, Cassidy joked about a detained immigrant saying he missed his wife. The complaint was dismissed because the ACIJ found "no levity or joking" in the comment.
How to avoid (successful) accusations of defamation on Twitter. A few thoughts from someone who is NOT a libel lawyer, but does say very critical things about named individuals. 1/
1. Facts are different from opinions. But stating an opinion can imply a fact. https://t.co/1PkiI4olib
2. When I tweet I aim to be sure A. I show the *facts* I am basing my *opinion* on. B. I have good reason to believe the *facts* are true. C. My opinion is reasonable based on the facts.
Here I am calling Arron Banks a racist (opinion). Pointing out this is because he called for mosques to be demolished (fact). 4/
I can prove this fact - and others - about what Banks has said. And I can justify why in my opinion that shows he’s a racist. 5/
1. Facts are different from opinions. But stating an opinion can imply a fact. https://t.co/1PkiI4olib
2. When I tweet I aim to be sure A. I show the *facts* I am basing my *opinion* on. B. I have good reason to believe the *facts* are true. C. My opinion is reasonable based on the facts.
Here I am calling Arron Banks a racist (opinion). Pointing out this is because he called for mosques to be demolished (fact). 4/
Reminder: https://t.co/KpWzq0aF8C is run by Arron Banks who called for British mosques to be demolished. They\u2019ve always been openly racist. https://t.co/n8uppHUqQ5
— Simon Cox (@SimonFRCox) October 9, 2019
I can prove this fact - and others - about what Banks has said. And I can justify why in my opinion that shows he’s a racist. 5/
Some WESC submissions that are worth a read....(my thread of bookmarks)
Judge Paula Grey is president of the Gender Recognition Panel
She doesn't make any recommendations, but she sets out how the process currently works
Which chimes with my analysis of the GRP User Panel and statistics https://t.co/XixEz7lNJv
She is also co-author if the Equal Treatment Bench Book and writes about how the judges are trained by Gendered Intelligence
There is the government's own response
https://t.co/bOn9XecAkz
On single sex spaces they say the law is clear that service providers are able to restrict access to spaces on the basis of biological sex where there is clear justification.
The response from @womensaid is significant.
Their members want trans survivors to get support they need but not by undermining their ability to serve women with female staff & female only services
They highlight lack of clarity
https://t.co/p7096sZcos
This was their position in 2015
They have moved on alot - they have been consulting with members since last year, and have had the courage to say what their members told them, not what Stonewall wanted to
Judge Paula Grey is president of the Gender Recognition Panel
She doesn't make any recommendations, but she sets out how the process currently works
Which chimes with my analysis of the GRP User Panel and statistics https://t.co/XixEz7lNJv
She is also co-author if the Equal Treatment Bench Book and writes about how the judges are trained by Gendered Intelligence
There is the government's own response
https://t.co/bOn9XecAkz
On single sex spaces they say the law is clear that service providers are able to restrict access to spaces on the basis of biological sex where there is clear justification.
The response from @womensaid is significant.
Their members want trans survivors to get support they need but not by undermining their ability to serve women with female staff & female only services
They highlight lack of clarity
https://t.co/p7096sZcos
This was their position in 2015
They have moved on alot - they have been consulting with members since last year, and have had the courage to say what their members told them, not what Stonewall wanted to
You May Also Like
Krugman is, of course, right about this. BUT, note that universities can do a lot to revitalize declining and rural regions.
See this thing that @lymanstoneky wrote:
And see this thing that I wrote:
And see this book that @JamesFallows wrote:
And see this other thing that I wrote:
One thing I've been noticing about responses to today's column is that many people still don't get how strong the forces behind regional divergence are, and how hard to reverse 1/ https://t.co/Ft2aH1NcQt
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) November 20, 2018
See this thing that @lymanstoneky wrote:
And see this thing that I wrote:
And see this book that @JamesFallows wrote:
And see this other thing that I wrote:
A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.
Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.
6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices
https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x
PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.
735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices
https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ
The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.
The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.
Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.
6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices
https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x
PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.
735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices
https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ
The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.
The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.
