Legal Matters

Two gun-related charges have been brought against the suspect in an apparent assassination attempt of Trump. A detention hearing is scheduled, and more charges are expected. https://t.co/37rDV0oMm3

— CNN (@CNN) September 16, 2024

No surprise, except the article doesn't say "more charges are expected." Although I'm sure they are. What it does say is:

The counts include possession of a firearm while a convicted felon and possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number.  

Not suprised by either (both federal violations, not state).  Arraignment is set for Sept. 30; any other charges will probably be filed by then, and depend heavily on Routh's cooperation and/or his social media. 

The two charges are fairly easy to prove, and rather difficult to defend against, provided the DOJ can prove Routh is the one who left the gun there (that is an assumption at this point).  Then again, if they can prove that (from Routh's statements; I don't think there were eyewitnesses who could identify Routh with the gun in his custody or control), they might have a leg up on an attempted murder or assault charge.  But that gets a bit dicier; not impossible, just tougher to establish than these two charges will be.

IOW, these two charges could be a 10-minute bench trial.  Proving more serious charges would require stronger evidence, which may, or may not, be as readily available. 

Speaking of which:

Judge tosses Ken Paxton’s lawsuit targeting Bexar County’s voter registration effort https://t.co/fWqUi1IgJR via @TexasTribune

— James Barragán 🌟 (@James_Barragan) September 16, 2024

The basics here are: Bexar County (just pronounce it "Bear" like we do) voted on September 3 to award a contract to mail out voter registration forms to unregistered persons in the county. On September 4, Paxton sued to enjoin (i.e., get an injunction) to stop them.  What Paxton didn't do, is request a TRO (Temporary Restraining Order).

In a suit like this, you always ask for a TRO and a hearing on same even before the defendant has been served with the suit.  You do this because you need to stop the defendant from doing whatever they are doing, and a TRO freezes them for 10 days (at most), while they can get to court and argue against the TRO being turned into a temporary injunction (one pending until the case goes to trial).  Paxton didn't do that.  And then he went one step further:

Ryan Kercher, deputy chief of the special litigation division in the attorney general’s office, argued that the plan could result in ineligible people registering to vote. Paxton appealed the decision on Monday evening, claiming Bexar officials "expedited" the mail out to take place before the hearing.

 Kercher is: a) an incompetent boob, or b) didn't seek a TRO on purpose.  The correct answer is "b)."  Paxton didn't even try to make an argument that an emergency existed.  He could have had a TRO on September 4, except he didn't want one.  By the time this got to court on a motion to dismiss (which was granted):

“The target of the mailing — qualified individuals who recently moved to or within Bexar County — have received those forms, and perhaps have already returned them,” said Bexar County Assistant Criminal District Attorney Robert W. Piatt III.

Which was, in no small part, probably why the judge dismissed the case.  Did Paxton know he had no chance of getting a TRO (it's not that hard to do, if you have grounds for an injunction.  Whether you can keep it is a bit tougher, but a TRO is usually granted ex parte, that is, without other parties at the hearing.  But that's why it only lasts 10 days.)?  My guess is, he did.  Which effectively means he had no grounds for this suit (that would be why the judge dismissed so quickly, too.  Paxton was dilatory, and didn't present any persuasive legal argument for his claims.) sdBut he filed suit anyway, just as he's now appealing.  His audience is not the judges on the appellate bench, it's the MAGA boobs in the hinterlands who think brown people are going to illegally put Democrats into office.

Paxton isn't being a lawyer.  He's just playing one on TeeVee.

I think the DOJ will do a better job against Mr. Routh.  Although I'm still not sure his intent (if he effectively confesses) is enough to combine with his actions (poking a rifle through a fence and then running away) to create a crime.  Mens rea is part of it, but the actus reus is necessary, too.  And considerieng he never had line of sight on Trump, never pulled the trigger, just poked a gun he shouldn't have had (felon in possession) through a chain link fence; well, I don't know if that meets the elements of any charge for attempted....anything.  Eh, we'll see.d