- Joined
- Mar 27, 2019
My read on the situation is that Chupp sees the appeals process as inevitable given his prior bench rulings, and he hints he thinks the appeal probably will succeed to get most of the causes of action at least past the TCPA level, given his comments to Sam Johnson.
Opinion seconded. That would suggest he's pretty set on dismissing Marchi wholesale himself, though. And that, in fact, he's trying to be set in his rulings overall such that a motion to reconsider will likely not accomplish anything.
It's odd, though. He speaks of appeal as if it's a definite thing, but the further implication is that appeal would possibly be granted. He obviously couldn't manage a way to make his rulings appeal-proof, and rightly so-- the hearing was a mess from the bottom up (that he phrases this as being part of the standard back-and-forth between him and the appellate appears disingenuous, from my perspective). But if that's the case, why wouldn't he be open to reconsider upon motion to do so?
Probably has to do with the fact that the hearing was altogether defective.
So, I'm pretty sure the death threats were a pretense. He really did catch word that the appellate court authorized sodomy against judges whose decisions they had to kick back because of their exceptionalism.