This order seems to have grown out of a motion seeking a preliminary injunction. The Court then formed it into a motion for Partial Summary Judgment but that’s the problem. Under Fed. R. Civ. P Rule 54(b) the Court needs to make a specific finding to make the case appealable and enforceable. If he had ruled under the standard for preliminary injunctions last time I looked at it that order is appealable. But an order on one count of the Amended Complaint that does not purport to be final under the Rule 54(b) standard is not an enforceable judgment. Not yet anyway. Plus no injunction.
Any other folks with a view I’d welcome their input.
Link to the Amended Complaint. There are four claims and though the court may have sought to enter a final judgment on all the counts it appears to me at least count four that is dealing with the regulation has still to be determined. Also the injunction was not granted.
Here is the motion that I think was the basis for the relief requested. Application for preliminary injunction
Here is the order that appears to address the Application for preliminary injunction as summary judgment but does not address Rule 54(b) Texas-v-US-Partial-Summary-Judgment
Added a link to the full Texas Docket.
It looks like political grandstanding. Pro tip to the GOP judiciary. You’re now part of a Kremlin front group. You might want to ease up on the political grandstanding. Remember, no need to prove a crime to remove a judge. Just bad acts. Just sayin.
Can’t say this isn’t normal but it did buy him time to live off the tax payers for another nine months.
Here is the Indictment if you want to see the scope of the charges against them.