Judge in CNN v. Trump case says he will rule on Thursday

CNN ^ | Nov. 14, 2018 | Brian Stelter, Marshall Cohen and David Shortell,

[Spacetrucker]

Of course; that should not matter one iota if the judge rules on the law and not on snowflake emotional meltdowns.

[Spacetrucker]

Rephrase: if the judge dismisses the case on constitutional grounds (separation of powers, anyone?).

[Oscar in Batangas]

Hell, let him rule in favor of accoster. The judge can’t compel anyone at the podium ever to call on CNN again

[seawolf101]

The young lady needs to sue acosturd and cnn for assault.

[eclectic]

That is a good idea. The press-conferences have become counter-productive. Just a group of psychos shouting accusations at Trump or Sarah Sanders. Ask them to submit questions in writing from now on.

[House Atreides]

About time Trump gets a friendly judge. It should be tossed out with a harsh reprimand to CNN and court costs.
***************************************************
Friendly judges? The best are HONEST, NON-AGENDANISTA judges. I think we have an honest judge on this instant case.

[gunnut]

Shut it all down. No reporters in for a few days and see how quick they turn on Acosta.

[Gene Eric]

Why hasn’t Acosta been arrested for assault?

[mrsmith]

Shame he didn’t throw it out immediately and charge frivolous suit fees.
The idea that the Judicial Branch can decide whom the Executive must see is intolerable.

[Mr. K]

I agree- just issue a daily press release.

And Trump himself can go on talk shows like Hannity, Rush, etc. until the so-called ‘main stream media’ gets a clue.

[Jumper]

The guy who “Acosta-d” the President would have been held in contempt if he conducted himself interrupting a judge; therefore, interrupting the president is contempt in and of itself, not withstanding Acosta-ing the president for good measure!

[WASCWatch]

How did this come to such a quick ruling?

Some decisions are really easy. While there is a constitutional right to free speech, there is no right to be heard or ask questions. Acosta has plenty of forums at which he can speak and no one is attempting to stop him.

[BeauBo]

“The case was assigned to Judge Timothy J. Kelly, a Trump appointee.”

Great chance to audition for a bigger part - slap down CNN like Scalia would.

[dsm69]

It’s a Trump appointed Judge

[dsm69]

The White House Intern WILL HAVE TO PRESS ASSAULT CHARGES for Acosta to have the cuffs slapped on him!!

[PUGACHEV]

In the D.C. Circuit, a press pass to the White House under certain circumstances has been a right under the 1st and 5th Amendments since the Sherrill case, a D.C. Federal Court of Appeals decision from 1977. Right or wrong, it’s an objective fact that Sherrill is the law which applies here, until the Court of Appeals or SCOTUS changes it. The District Court judge hearing CNN’s argument for a preliminary injunction to restore Acosta’s credentials is bound by that case. Although, my reading of Sherrill does not necerally lead to the conclusion that Acosta’s rights were violated, or that he is likely to prove that they were, or that he is entitled to have them restored before CNN’s case is tried.

This is an occasion where I’m inclined to “trust the plan” and see what Trump has in store for CNN and Acosta. It’s going to be ugly fun, I’ll bet.

[Seruzawa]

Who cares. The President is coequal and could tell the Judge to pound sand.

[BigEdLB]

Secret service can cite hazard to Prez effectively overruling judge, which in this case Trump can ignore

[fella]

Move the briefing room out of the Whitehouse to one of the less desirable areas of D.C. and hold them at 10 pm.

[NetAddicted]

Bookmarking to read later.