Thomas Frampton
@tframpton.bsky.social
UVA Law, visiting at GW Law, sometimes lawyer, full-time Ruth wrangler. Speaking as private citizen, outside official job duties, on matters of political, social or other concern. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=1785600
Top posts
There’s a lot to do if/when we get past all *this*, but a requirement to run as a Democrat should be support for codifying Bivens. (If federal officials deprive you of clearly established constitutional rights, you should have the same remedies as when Georgia or Utah officials do. Winning issue.)
Proud to be a signatory on this letter. And, as if to prove the point, here’s the DOJ official responsible for ousting Jim Ryan and leading the “negotiations” with our Board of Visitors. It has nothing to do with protecting Jews; 100% with advancing a far-right partisan agenda.
Ryan’s shameful ouster is on all of them, for sure, but don’t sleep on AG Jason Miyares. UVA’s GC works for him, not the President; our GC is technically a “Senior AAG.” It’s tough for UVA to fight Trump with two hands tied behind our back. (Something to consider this Nov. if you vote in VA.)
Latest posts
![Alito's dissenting opinion in Ramos v. Louisiana - "Too much public discourse today is sullied by ad hominem rhetoric, that is, attempts to discredit an argument not by proving that it is unsound but by attacking the character or motives of the argument's proponents. The majority regrettably succumbs to this trend. At the start of its opinion, the majority asks this rhetorical question: "Why do Louisiana and Oregon allow nonunanimous convictions?" Ante, at 1394. And the answer it suggests? Racism, white supremacy, the Ku Klux Klan. Ante, at 1393-1394. Non-unanimous verdicts, the Court implies, are of a piece with Jim Crow laws, the poll tax, and other devices once used to disfranchise African-Americans. Ibid.
If Louisiana and Oregon originally adopted their laws allowing non-unanimous verdicts for these reasons,[2] that is deplorable, but what does that have to do with the broad constitutional question before us? The answer is: nothing."](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:jnc4iz4srwikm6b4ca4jtg4t/bafkreigfpilwywci6qg6ihthke6rcauhegzamnrknirxjp5hdqzk4ntq3u)
![Alito in Wolford v. Lopez - "/We could stop there, but there is another reason for rejecting Hawaii's reliance on this statute. It was adopted by the Louisiana Legislature between the end of the Civil War and the beginning of Reconstruction. When the war ended, the legislatures in defeated Confederate States quickly enacted so-called Black Codes that aimed to perpetuate the subjugation of blacks.[17] The statute Hawaii cites was part of Louisiana's Black Code, and it provided a tool for disarming blacks and thus leaving them defenseless against attacks. See 125 F. 4th, at 1239 (VanDyke, J., dissenting from denial of reh'g en banc).
As we laid out in McDonald, the right to keep and bear arms was crucially important for vulnerable blacks during this period. See 561 U. S., at 757, 771, 776-779; id., at 843-846 (opinion of THOMAS, J.). And this was well-understood by the Republicans in Congress who were responsible for drafting, approving, and securing the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Republican Party Platforms of 1856 and 1860 called for protection of the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. Unless we put history entirely out of our minds, Hawaii's claim that this tainted artifact illuminates the original understanding of the right to keep and bear arms cannot be taken seriously."](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:jnc4iz4srwikm6b4ca4jtg4t/bafkreif6z4uklxwuiiakoiv42ow7slmt5jxz7iuldjupkwosvi5yfgdhzm)
Rewatching X-Files Season 1. The first 7 episodes (from 1993) are: alien abduction; UFOs; immortal serial killer, alien abduction; NJ cryptids; a ghost that electrocutes people, and... ... DoD trying to seize a civilian AI computer system after it learns to hack and kills two people. 👀
TFW the DA says your client didn’t exercise “due diligence” in discovering the Brady evidence they hid for 35 years, when (a) he worked as a slave in a field ($0.04/hr) for the $150 copying fees; (b) then they swore they “lost” it; and (c) promised to “immediately notify” him if found (they didn’t).
A brief reminder that less than 30 days ago, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro held an absolutely unhinged press conference smearing the defendant and doing absolutely everything in her power to violate Rule 3.8(f). Absolutely warrants referral to state bar authorities. www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlTu...
