There is a now-relevant parallel here to the difference here between matters before a judge & matters before a jury. Judges are far more reluctant to strike testimony or evidence if they are the only recipients of it, with the theory being that they are really smart about ...

1/ I want to briefly tease out Cruz's statement, which will help set expectations about what might happen January 6:

2/ At its heart, the presser states, "we intend to vote on January 6 to reject the electors from disputed states as not ‘regularly given' and ‘lawfully certified' (the statutory requisite), unless & until that emergency 10-day audit is completed."

3/ How does a10-day emergency audit happen? Congress would need to enact a statute to amend the Electoral Count Act before January 6, when it's compelled by law to meet. That seems unlikely.

4/ Cruz et al. seem to hold a "thick" view of the Electoral Count Act, adhering to the "statutory requisite," which means that Congress would need to amend or adhere to the statute.

5/ A 10-day audit is impossible under the current statute. Objections to a state are limited to 2 hours' debate. Adjournments are fixed in the statute, too--no recess if you've hit five days:

In late October 2020, the Edmonton Proud Boys appeared at a People Vs. Predators rally.

One member of this @splcenter-designated hate group is John-Clayton Wilson/Jay Wilson/JC Wilson/JC2theW. (1/10)

@DoxerPb @RuthlessWe @AntifaGarfield @AntiFashGordon @AntifascistF12

JCW is an artist and performer, having done trapeze work. He also operated a YouTube channel, which provides men's rights activist analysis of feminism and the LGBTQ+ community, despite being a member of that community. (2/10)

It's hard to know why JC joined the bigoted Proud Boys, but JC's history of men's rights activism and anti-feminism help the connection make sense.

Here's a sample of some video topics. The language and themes align with the far-right. (3/10)

Still, JC being a member of the LGBTQ+ community makes his decision to join a hate group puzzling for us.

Not that this is unheard of, of course, but these people are not your allies. They aren't even allies with each other and we see this play out all the time. (4/10)

We gave JC multiple chances to get in touch so we could connect him with resources and people who specialize in leaving hate groups. He got the message, but he responded by changing his name and trying to hide his accounts

It's not too late to leave. We can delete tweets. (5/10)

Kerala High Court resumes hearing of Bail Application of M Sivasankar, Former Principal Secretary of Kerala Chief Minister

Sivasankar is presently in ED's custody for alleged involvement in the Kerala Gold Smuggling case. He is also being investigated by the NIA and Customs Department.

Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta is arguing for Sivasankar.

He denies ED's allegations that Sivasankar contacted customs officials to clear the baggage alleged to be containing smuggled gold.

Gupta claims statement made by co-accused Swapna Suresh about Sivasankar's involvement are not credible as the same were made after her arrest.

Gupta points out that the correspondence between Sivasankar and Swapna does not disclose any knowledge on the latter's part.

He also tells Court that all of Swapna's statements categorically denied his client's involvement in gold smuggling, until before her arrest.

A #WomanQuestion thread about Brill's prestigious & long-running Studies Islamic Law & Society series. I'm looking at stats as I attempt to understad how gendered (& racialized) hierarchies of prestige operate to construct subfields w/in Islamic Studies

From its first in 1996 (Sherman Jackson on al-Qarafi) to its most recent in 2020 (Rudolph Peters' essays on Egyptian & Islamic law), the series includes 41 monographs & 10 edited volumes, of which 3 are festschriften.

Of the 41 monographs published over 25 years, 5 (12%) are by women. The first was Miriam Hoexter (#6 in the series), in 1998.

The next, the still-regnant study of maslaha by Felicitas Opwis, was published a dozen years & two dozen titles later (#31).

There was far less of a break before Sabrina Joseph's monograph exploring Hanafi regulation of tenants & sharecroppers in 17th-19th C Syria

Short thread on impeachment witnesses:

First, let’s remember that this case had unusual and powerful evidence in the public record. If you are prosecuting a bank robbery and you have the surveillance camera footage, you don’t need witnesses to tell you what happened.

1/

Second, the only areas where witnesses could help was confirming what the circumstantial evidence already showed about Trump’s knowledge and intent, both before and after the riot. Mgrs did great job of using his own tweets to show his knowledge but witnesses could confirm.

2/

The case was really strong as is but new witness testimony would very likely become the sole focus of the media and the public. For that reason, it is especially important to avoid taking risks with witnesses a) who are adverse to you and b) whose testimony is unknown.

3/

Since the only witnesses that would be helpful are ones close to Trump, executive privilege would invariably be an issue. If a witness is not cooperative, s/he would likely fall back on EP to avoid testifying. Hashing that out would take months.

4/

The reality is that Trump has created a dynamic through the Ukraine whistleblower and Ukraine witnesses where his domestic terrorist supporters threaten violence against witnesses against him. This fear is real and it is a huge problem. This should be everyone’s focus.

5/