Excellent question! While that is generally the case, there are limited circumstances in which an appellate court will hear evidence that is not on the record from the district court. So, to answer your question - it depends. Probably? (That's seriously the best answer I can give)
Below is a link to instantly download a law review article from 2012 on the topic. It's an instant pdf download, so only click if you want a download of the article:
They have to teach first year law students this fact very early on to avoid that misconseption!
To the extent that those plaintiffs are arguing that they were denied the right to vote - as opposed to a denial on the grounds of equal protection - it certainly seems correct (just my best legal judgment, mind you) that the proper defendants would be the counties that actually denied them the opportunity to cure (and thus, vote).
Think of it this way, what remedy could the county Philly is in give to someone halfway across the state? It's not that county that denied their ability to cure the ballot, it was the county they lived in.
Additionally, thank you for a great question!
In federal civil procedure, a dismissal with prejudice is a final judgment - thus appealable.
The first part of the order is a grant of a motion to dismiss w/prejudice.
Don't forget to look at the parent company - Paragon.
https://www.paragon-europe.com/
They have all the trappings of a private industry implementation of a social credit score system
Legal pede here, that's a standard disposition of a case and it's beneficial toward the Trump campaign. Without prejudice means "go ahead and fix your lawsuit, then re-file." With prejudice means "this is a final determination, appeal is your next route."
He was doing ads for them back during the election! I'm glad he's still doing so, but he's been doing great work with ads!
Explain why for the layman?
Just an FYI, that's not how SLAPP works (nor anti-SLAPP laws).
While the disciplinary claim is akin to a SLAPP suit, you cannot then file a suit against the complaining party for behavior akin to a SLAPP suit. Rather, the California anti-SLAPP law gives defendants to SLAPP suits in California the ability to stop the lawsuit before it gets very far (keeping the cost way down).
Plaintiffs that bring lawsuits that may affect free speech in California must prove that they are likely to win and that free speech shouldn't prevent the court from hearing the case before the discover process begins - this is the primary effect of anti-SLAPP laws.
You can stop, but they'll just keep getting their money from the Rockafeller Foundation, Carnegie Institute, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and other globalist oiligarch shill groups
Chandler Crump
Don't forget his name, because he will be holding elected office before you know it!
This is desperate flailing and will go nowhere. The ARDC is not going to punish an attorney for filing frivilous suits, when the supposedly frivolous suits are still pending. That would be insane
And there are real stories of hypocrite Dems not wearing masks or breaking other rules. Take Newsom in CA!
This division looks like they're trying to be the private sector means for the west to implement a social credit score system:
Scytl was acquired by this company in October.
https://www.paragon-europe.com/
Paragon is big, a lot to read into. This could take time
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_M.Young(diplomat)
Taiwan, another recipient
We are over the target my friend:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Rooney
Check out the controversies tab
This was the ambassador to Vatican at the time of the cable.
From wikipedia: "Deep state comments Rooney has made statements suggesting that he believes in the existence of a deep state in the United States.[48] In a December 26, 2017, MSNBC interview, Rooney, while calling into question the integrity of the FBI and Justice department, who were conducting an investigation into Russian State interference in the 2016 elections and any possible collusion between Russia and the Donald Trump presidential campaign along with any related crimes, alluded to a "deep state", presumably seeking to undermine the Trump presidency. Rooney stated there ought to be a "purge" within those departments.[49] Rooney suggested this is evidenced by there having been isolated incidents among members of those agencies who were documented as having been demoted or, where relevant, removed from the Mueller probe for having expressed anti-Trump bias or pro-Hillary Clinton bias.
Advocacy of purging the FBI Rooney attracted national attention in December 2017 when he suggested that the FBI be purged of agents that he believed were politically compromised, and saying he felt pretty frustrated with FBI officials in their investigation of Trump; and by doing so, Rooney is putting himself squarely in the corner of Donald Trump, according to several sources.[50][51][52]"
Philippines was a recipient of the cable!
The cable - per wikileaks - went to latin american countries, the Phillipines (his wife) Sec State, Southern Command (Miami), Europe (Brussels), Canada..... And the Vatican.
He sent this to the Vatican
"Brownfield returned to Venezuela as U.S. ambassador from 2004 to 2007 and made a point of visiting pro-Chávez neighborhoods while promoting "baseball diplomacy" between the two nations. Chávez cast him as a meddlesome imperialist, and Brownfield said he woke up in a hotel once and learned from CNN that Chávez had threatened the night before to kick him out of the country. It wouldn't be the last time."
Read the WAPO article I linked here. He was hated by Chavez, and he returned the favor. Remember, WAPO is CIA, so if CIA lauds him as a bastion against VZW commies on his career's obituary, you can be sure it's true.
Pede, you're killing it. Keep up this great work!!!
You are correct, except today they officially assigned RGBs circuits to ACB, whereas it was defacto up until today.
This is why everyone started posting about it today, including Bannon and others.
I found this a few days ago and posted it here, but it got no traction. Thank you for reviving this!
Check out this article from Manilla Times
They're moving for an expedited appeal - when you do that, you propose a schedule for appeal. The biggest worry was that this judge would drag out a full trial, which is completely unpredictable and can take months if not years.