Cathie (she/hers)
@suprmomcat.bsky.social
Clinical Mental Health Counselor/Fierce Advocate/Nonprofit Exec Personal not Professional Content Likely Bots=Instant Block *Flirt in public, not my DMs!* GenX LGBTQ+ and BLM aspiring Ally and co-conspirator. Headshot: Digital Magic Photography and Design
Reposted by Cathie (she/hers)
The physician's assistant is looking over my history and asking questions and there's a lot of "...huh!" responses.
I think they normally deal with normal APS and not the Catastrophic variant. But they're a research place, so they're very interested in me. For better or worse.
I think they normally deal with normal APS and not the Catastrophic variant. But they're a research place, so they're very interested in me. For better or worse.
December 2, 2025 at 10:52 PM
The physician's assistant is looking over my history and asking questions and there's a lot of "...huh!" responses.
I think they normally deal with normal APS and not the Catastrophic variant. But they're a research place, so they're very interested in me. For better or worse.
I think they normally deal with normal APS and not the Catastrophic variant. But they're a research place, so they're very interested in me. For better or worse.
Reposted by Cathie (she/hers)
A very frustrated Judge Breyer says "I'm not asking if there's violence, I'm asking for evidence that the state is unable or unwilling to deal with the violence?" DOJ says the molotov cocktail incident needed help. Breyer says you didn't send the guard there, so your claim rings hollow. END/
December 5, 2025 at 6:44 PM
A very frustrated Judge Breyer says "I'm not asking if there's violence, I'm asking for evidence that the state is unable or unwilling to deal with the violence?" DOJ says the molotov cocktail incident needed help. Breyer says you didn't send the guard there, so your claim rings hollow. END/
Reposted by Cathie (she/hers)
Here is the question presented. It's a relatively clean vehicle for the Supreme Court to finally decide whether it is lawful for the president to deny birthright citizenship to the children of immigrants. www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25...
December 5, 2025 at 6:55 PM
Here is the question presented. It's a relatively clean vehicle for the Supreme Court to finally decide whether it is lawful for the president to deny birthright citizenship to the children of immigrants. www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25...
Reposted by Cathie (she/hers)
Lemme guess. Greg Katsas is a Trumper MAGAt....Oh yeah, he also greenlit "excessive" executive firing power lawandcrime.com/high-profile...
Judge goes off as DC Circuit blesses 'excessive' Trump firing powers, warns of 'autocracy'
The lone dissenter tore into the conservative majority for greenlighting Trump's "excessive" firing power, warning "autocracy" may follow.
lawandcrime.com
December 6, 2025 at 12:34 AM
Lemme guess. Greg Katsas is a Trumper MAGAt....Oh yeah, he also greenlit "excessive" executive firing power lawandcrime.com/high-profile...
Reposted by Cathie (she/hers)
When I was a young paralegal, we went to oral arguments at the Supreme Court where someone tried this. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor EVISCERATED the guy.
December 6, 2025 at 1:51 AM
When I was a young paralegal, we went to oral arguments at the Supreme Court where someone tried this. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor EVISCERATED the guy.
Reposted by Cathie (she/hers)
Is that another “we think the term _________ means something different” deals?
They argued for years that “Shall” doesn’t mean what most reasonable people think it does (and they seem to keep getting away with it).
They argued for years that “Shall” doesn’t mean what most reasonable people think it does (and they seem to keep getting away with it).
December 6, 2025 at 12:35 AM
Is that another “we think the term _________ means something different” deals?
They argued for years that “Shall” doesn’t mean what most reasonable people think it does (and they seem to keep getting away with it).
They argued for years that “Shall” doesn’t mean what most reasonable people think it does (and they seem to keep getting away with it).
Reposted by Cathie (she/hers)
DOJ also invokes 'leading jurist' standard to argue that if DC Circuit Judge Greg Katsas found Boasberg's order ambiguous, no one can be guilty of violating it. Doc: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
Notice (Other) – #198 in J.G.G. v. TRUMP (D.D.C., 1:25-cv-00766) – CourtListener.com
NOTICE of Filing of Declarations in Response to Court's December 1 Order by PAMELA J. BONDI, PETER B. HEGSETH, KRISTI NOEM, MARCO A. RUBIO, MADISON SHEAHAN, DONALD J. TRUMP, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE...
storage.courtlistener.com
December 6, 2025 at 12:08 AM
DOJ also invokes 'leading jurist' standard to argue that if DC Circuit Judge Greg Katsas found Boasberg's order ambiguous, no one can be guilty of violating it. Doc: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...