<p>The House Judiciary Committee wants to <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/rebaoousaa-ans.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">change</a> the US Attorney statute to say what Attorney General Bondi claimed it did in court. This would involve the Senate voluntarily surrendering their power to vote on nominees, so … lotsa luck. Back in New Jersey, prosecutors <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.njd.540663/gov.uscourts.njd.540663.319.0.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">say</a> they’ll seek superseding indictments in cases with Alina Habba’s name on them, to remove the stink of illegitimacy.</p><p><br></p><p>The DOJ has quietly <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520.478.0.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">settled</a> a trollsuit filed by red states and rightwing trolls, including Robert Kennedy, alleging social media censorship by the Biden administration. The Supreme Court already dropkicked this case once, so the parties agreed to simply declare victory and go home.</p><p><br></p><p>And Sam Bankman-Fried finds new ways to <a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66631292/united-states-v-bankman-fried" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">piss off judges</a> and be sooooo weird, this time with help from his mom.</p><p><br></p><p>MAIN SHOW:</p><p><br></p><p>The DOJ settled a <a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66930673/flynn-v-united-states" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">bogus lawsuit</a> filed by former national security advisor Mike Flynn. His malicious prosecution claims had already been tossed by a federal judge, but she let him amend his complaint again, and by then Trump was back in the White House. Is this a new template for MAGA criminals to back the truck up to the Treasury and start filling it with taxpayer cash? The <a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73101995/sullivan-v-united-states/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">January 6 defendants</a> sure seem to think so! We’ll compare a newly filed case by rioters with a <a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70474277/tarrio-v-united-states-of-america" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">suit</a> filed by pardoned Proud Boys.</p><p><br></p><p>And we’ve got a deep dive into the birthright citizenship case Trump v. Barbara, which will be argued at the Supreme Court this Wednesday.</p><p><br></p><p>Kennedy v. Biden</p><p><a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67089647/kennedy-v-biden/?order_by=desc" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67089647/kennedy-v-biden/?order_by=desc</a></p><p><br></p><p>Missouri v. Biden</p><p><a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63290154/missouri-v-biden/?order_by=desc" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63290154/missouri-v-biden/?order_by=desc</a></p><p><br></p><p>US v. Bankman-Fried</p><p>https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66631292/united-states-v-bankman-fried</p><p><br></p><p>Tarrio v. US [Proud Boys Bivens Suit]</p><p><a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70474277/tarrio-v-united-states-of-america" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70474277/tarrio-v-united-states-of-america</a></p><p><br></p><p>Sullivan v. US [J6ers FTCA Suit]</p><p><a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73101995/sullivan-v-united-states/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73101995/sullivan-v-united-states/</a></p><p><br></p><p>Flynn v. US [Flynn FTCA]</p><p><a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66930673/flynn-v-united-states" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66930673/flynn-v-united-states</a></p><p><br></p><p>Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 US 393 (1857)</p><p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3231372247892780026" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3231372247892780026</a></p><p><br></p><p>US v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 US 649 (1898)</p><p><a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3381955771263111765" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3381955771263111765</a></p><p><br></p><p>Indian Citizenship Act of 1924</p><p><a href="https://www.archives.gov/files/historical-docs/doc-content/images/indian-citizenship-act-1924.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.archives.gov/files/historical-docs/doc-content/images/indian-citizenship-act-1924.pdf</a></p><p><br></p><p>Indian Law Scholars’ Amicus Brief [via SCOTUS]</p><p><a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-365/399370/20260226125541217_Barbara%20Amicus%20Brief.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-365/399370/20260226125541217_Barbara%20Amicus%20Brief.pdf</a></p><p><br></p><p>The Nationality Act of 1940 [student Note]</p><p><a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/1335062" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.jstor.org/stable/1335062</a></p><p><br></p><p>Trump v. Barbara</p><p><a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/25-365.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/25-365.html</a></p><p><br></p><p>Show Links:</p><p><a href="https://www.lawandchaospod.com/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.lawandchaospod.com/</a></p><p>BlueSky: @LawAndChaosPod</p><p>Threads: @LawAndChaosPod</p><p>Twitter: @LawAndChaosPod</p><p>See Privacy Policy at <a href="https://art19.com/privacy" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://art19.com/privacy</a> and California Privacy Notice at <a href="https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info</a>.</p>