Mark S. Zaid

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@Theon_Orbis @CindisPLace @courtmouse2003 @Eathbound420 You're not understanding what I'm saying. I'm referring to civil immunity, not criminal culpability. Yes, Westfall Act immunity can cover rape committed during scope of employment. I recall a case involving a mail carrier. But perpetrator still gets prosecuted. — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

RT @Nationals: This is Juan Soto’s 77th @MLB HR. This is the 19th ballpark he’s homered in. *He’s only 22* @JuanSoto25_ // #NATITUDE htt… — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

RT @BrianKarem: My original reporting and the context by which Trump had protestors removed. He bragged in a tweet that anyone who breached… — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

RT @WSJ: Former White House counsel Don McGahn told Congress he declined to relay ex-President Donald Trump’s demand to remove the Russia p… — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

Still disgraceful and embarrassing that this ever occurred. — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

RT @BBCWorld: Sacred objects: From police evidence to museum pieces https://t.co/5S5vJFQXbp — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

RT @Militarydotcom: Army Officers to Face More Scrutiny as Promotion Boards Gain Access to Restricted Personnel Files https://t.co/TefFQOyI… — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@Theon_Orbis @CindisPLace @courtmouse2003 @Eathbound420 Understand Westfall Act only applies to civil liability, and it's designed to protect govt through immunity, not individual. It most certainly doesn't shield individual from criminal culpability, i.e., prosecution. — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

RT @RDEliason: @MarkSZaidEsq Not merely every president -- every federal employee, who would have to parse every word spoken in their offic… — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@kristiwelshies @BradMossEsq I think you would be quite surprised to learn what has been considered "scope of employment" for Westfall Act immunity certification purposes. Lots of criminal behavior. — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@AkivaMCohen @Popehat I would be surprised, however, if this issue of whether President is "employee" of USG has not been addressed by at least one court and/or OLC opinion. — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@AkivaMCohen @Popehat Valid legal analysis & possible argument for sure. I haven't researched this issue. My primary point has been to explain how broad "scope of employment" is, to include criminal behavior, & that DOJ's position is not inconsistent w/past practice. — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@Progressive_SW https://t.co/Fvq2YktR7t — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@OstensiblyEthan Yes, let's get rid of govt!!! Anarchy is the way! https://t.co/U7BQ0ex8yd — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@jeffhauser @ElieNYC @BradMossEsq I really hope it's one that doesn't involve undertaking legal research. Council on Am. Islamic Relations v. Ballenger, 444 F.3d 659, 664 (D.C. Cir. 2006). Personal speech. In scope of employment. Immunity. — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@jeffhauser @ElieNYC @BradMossEsq So what law do you practice Jeff? https://t.co/WF23QcppT8 — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@ElieNYC @BradMossEsq Now I remember why I don't read The Nation any longer. Enjoy your Twitter lawyer degree. It's worth all the money you paid for it. https://t.co/WF23QcppT8 — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

https://t.co/WF23QcppT8 — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

https://t.co/WF23QcppT8 — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

RT @fsl3: @Teri_Kanefield @BradMossEsq Excellent summary, @Teri_Kanefield. FWIW, I agree with your analysis and your conclusion (2d'd by @M… — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

RT @Teri_Kanefield: For people asking me about Merrick Garland's decision in the defamation case, I'll refer you to this article by @BradM… — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@SpeakSpeaks @SuspiciousHamst @BradMossEsq Exactly. — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

RT @RadioFreeTom: @MarkSZaidEsq I think it's terrific that you believed this would stop them from commenting. — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@RadioFreeTom Lol, it was worth a shot. I just mute the Twitter lawyers. Helps identify them. — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@2cannan1 That has nothing to do with this legal dispute. — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

Do you really want President Biden sued for some comment he makes off the cuff that someone views as defamatory, whether it is or not? Can you not see potential for harm & abuse? I am all for narrowing of scope. Tell Congress. — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

I want nothing less than Trump being held accountable, criminally & civilly, for so many things. But ppl need to realize DOJ's decision is designed to protect every President from being sued for defamation for comments made while in office. Can you not see pandora's box? — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@misguidedsoul7 I think you need to read more — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@bpera07 @HTardel @mcbyrne Do you not understand this is a congressional statute? Upheld by courts around the US for over 3 decades. Multiple times. Ridiculous to compare to Plessy v. Ferguson just bc you're ideologically biased and don't like the decision. Complain to your Member(s) of Congress. — PolitiTweet.org

Mark S. Zaid @MarkSZaidEsq

@LeFiffre Former federal prosecutors who don't have experience with civil litigation, which this is. Wonderful. So shush on them too. — PolitiTweet.org