Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Jeff Lewis

@jefflewis.bsky.social

1.5K followers 2.7K following 380 posts

⚖️ Appellate, anti-SLAPP and general civil litigation http://www.JeffLewisLaw.com. 🎙Co-Host of http://calpodcast.com. 🐉 D&D nerd. Los Angeles, California Signal: slapplaw.99 #AppellateSky #lawsky

www.JeffLewisLaw.com.

Posts Media Videos Starter Packs

Pinned

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · Nov 18

My interests:

Law ⚖️
D&D 🐉
Diablo IV👹
Comic-Con 🦸‍♂️
Legal Tech 💻
Critical Role 📺
Podcasting 🎙️
Photography 📷
Daggerheart 🗡️
First Amendment 📢
World of Warcraft 🌎
Lists Ordered by Item Length 📏

2 1 17

Reposted by Jeff Lewis

Ari Cohn @aricohn.com · 2d

SB 771, currently on Gavin Newsom's desk, is a combination of unconstitutional goals, an incomplete understanding of technology, and drafting that makes it even worse.

This week I wrote to Newsom urging him to veto the bill.

I explain the basics here: platformpolemics.aricohn.com/p/california...

California wants to coerce platforms into hosting less offensive speech with algorithmic liability law

First Amendment and Section 230 shocked to learn they no longer exist

platformpolemics.aricohn.com

6 32 96

Reposted by Jeff Lewis

Mike Masnick @mmasnick.bsky.social · 2d

OMG.

The meritocracy is really showing how the DOJ is now made up the best of the best, I guess.

Bradley P. Moss @bradmossesq.bsky.social · 2d

Someone gonna get fired …. @kenwhite.bsky.social @annabower.bsky.social

7 52 370

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 2d

@meplusdog.bsky.social you don't have to do this yourself. Just rely on AI to review the briefs for you!

a man in a suit and tie is smiling .

ALT: a man in a suit and tie is smiling .

media.tenor.com

1 2

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 2d

Yes! This! And what's the right solution for the Court of the Appeal. Leave the "bad" brief in place and find the arguments have been forfeit? And let the clients sue the lawyers for malpractice? Or give AI lawyers a free do over? No good answers to this.

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 2d

a man in a white shirt and tie is saying " oh snap "

ALT: a man in a white shirt and tie is saying " oh snap "

media.tenor.com

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 2d

I have not heard of this. Got a link for me? I'd be surprised if a court gives a "free get out of jail card" for this type of issue.

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 2d

The Court of Appeal has not ruled on the motion yet. It is not clear whether the Court of Appeal will deem a party's substantive arguments forfeit due to their lawyres' mishap.

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 2d

Follow Tony Ortega on BlueSky here:

bsky.app/profile/tony...

bsky.app

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 2d

Boies Schiller’s violation of the rules is not a valid basis for a do-over, especially after seeing the appellants’ reply brief. Quite the opposite—it is behavior deserving of serious sanction."

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 2d

[, rule] 8.204(a)(1)(B).” (Motion for Leave to File a Corrected Response Brief (Respondents’ Motion) 4.) But the respondents’ brief violates the rules of court only because Boies Schiller abdicated its ethical responsibility to read and review multiple cases before citing them.

1 1

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 2d

Some excerpts from the Horvitz & Levy brief opposing the "do over"

"Boies Schiller argues it is entitled to file a replacement brief because “the Filed Response Brief does not support each point by citation to appropriate authority and therefore does not comply with Cal. Rule[s] of Court

1 1

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 2d

Big law gets caught filing appellate brief with made-up cases. Opponent catches them. Big law asks for permission to file a "do over" brief. Opponent scorches them. Tony Ortega recounts the painful battle here: tonyortega.substack.com/p/scientolog....

Scientology blasts lawyers for Masterson victims in AI fiasco, wants sanctions

Since news first emerged that the lawsuit against Scientology and Danny Masterson brought by his victims (Bixler v.

tonyortega.substack.com

4 5 8

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 2d

Q: What’s a lawyer’s favorite kind of dog?

A: A subpoo-dle.

#ProfessionalHumor #OfficeLaughs #JokeOfTheDay #LawyerHumor #LegalJokes

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 3d

True. But if you are the "unicorn" defendant with a righteous anti-SLAPP motion that was denied by the district judge, the practical effect feels huge to you. SLAPP lawsuits themselves make up a small portion of civil filings but the impact on individuals can be enormous.

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 3d

Congress should finally pass a federal anti-SLAPP law. Until then, we’ll keep fighting these battles one forum at a time. ⚔️

#California #AppellateTips #Law #SLAPP

Here's the decision: www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/u...

www.courthousenews.com

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 3d

In one sense, we anti-SLAPP practitioners dodged a bullet: the court could have gone further and tossed anti-SLAPP out of federal court entirely (as the dissent urged). But the long-term fix isn’t judicial — it’s legislative. 🏛️

1 4

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 3d

The whole point of the statute is to protect defendants from meritless lawsuits targeting First Amendment activity — before years of litigation grind them down. The practical effect of today’s ruling? More forum-shopping by defamation plaintiffs who want to avoid robust anti-SLAPP protections. 😬

1 1

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 3d

That means defendants who lose at the trial level must now slog through discovery before they can appeal. 💸📚

💭 I tend to agree with Judge Bennett’s concurrence: California’s anti-SLAPP law creates substantive rights that should be fully applied in federal court.

2 1

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 3d

🚨 Big anti-SLAPP news from the Ninth Circuit ⚖️🔥

In Gopher Media LLC v. Melone (Oct. 9, 2025), the en banc Ninth Circuit just overruled Batzel v. Smith — holding that a denial of a California anti-SLAPP motion isn’t immediately appealable in federal court.

1 4

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 4d

In this episode of The California Appellate Law Podcast, Cherise Bacalski talks about Teaching Justices to Write with Jeff and Tim. Listen now: www.calpodcast.com/1093703/epis...

#AppellateLaw #LegalWriting

Reposted by Jeff Lewis

negev79 @negev79.bsky.social · 7d

Also in case anyone needs a reminder, Judge Immergut is not some radical lefty. She was on Ken Starr's team, famously deposed Monica Lewinsky, and was appointed by Trump. The difference between her and the Fed DOJ lawyers who just argued in front of her is that she lives in reality.

1 12

Reposted by Jeff Lewis

Anna Bower @annabower.bsky.social · 7d

Immergut: I'm handling this on expedited basis, but defendants haven't provided new info.

SHE RULES FROM THE BENCH: I grant the plaintiffs motion for a second TRO based on reasons stated in previous order...

67 510 2.4K

Reposted by Jeff Lewis

Raffi Melkonian @rmfifthcircuit.bsky.social · 7d

Is it good when federal judges have to schedule Sunday night 10 pm hearings about absurd military invasions of their state.

Anna Bower @annabower.bsky.social · 7d

COMING UP: Judge Immergut has set a hearing for 10 pm ET tonight (!) on Trump's effort to circumvent her temporary restraining order re: Oregon national guard deployment by calling up the federalized California national guard.

Date Filed
Oct 5, 2025
Description
* CSV
SCHEDULING ORDER: This Court, having received Plaintiffs' Second Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and request for Expedited Hearing, ECF 59, sets a hearing by Telephonic Conference at 7:00
p.m. tonight, October 5, 2025, before Judge Karin J. Immergut. Access information for "LISTEN ONLY" phone number for the Hearing. Telephone Number: 1-571-353-2301 (toll-free 1-833-
990-9400); Guest Meeting ID: 812-980-
324#. Note: If dropped from the conference, please rejoin the conference.
For complete conference connection instructions and etiquette guidelines, refer to ord.uscourts.gov/cms. Ordered on 10/5/25 by Judge Karin J. Immergut. (jy)
(Entered: 10/05/2025)

22 230 1K

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 7d

if passed, would direct the Federal Trade Commission to conduct a study on the governance of neural data.

www.congress.gov/bill/119th-c...

www.congress.gov

Jeff Lewis @jefflewis.bsky.social · 7d

Looks like the proliferation of smart, wearable technology and the implications for neural data privacy hit the radar of the U.S. Senate right before the shut down. 3 U.S. Senators have sponsored Senate Bill 2925 which,

www.congress.gov

1 1