A Christmas Eve NY State Court Trial Opinion -- Wrongly Decided. On To The Appeals.

This trial judge's Christmas Eve opinion is manifestly wrong -- on the law. See, Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 373 (1976) (plurality opinion); see also New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713, 715 (1971).

The New York state judge fails entirely to grapple with the US Supreme Court decisions, instead talking almost exclusively about attorney-client privilege being older even than a free press. But that indeed simply ignores the central question: the Supremes have already repeatedly ruled that the Times may report on, and publish these materials, and pay damages if such publishing was wrongful. On appeal, the Cahill firm will prevail, on behalf of the NYT. Backgrounder, here.

And in the federal courts of Manhattan, the NYT is already clearly winning. Veritas is in for some potentially criminal exposure there, as well. Hilarious. Onward, to a Christmas banquet -- with family and dear friends, under sunny Arizona skies. Grinning. . . .

नमस्ते