Mnangagwa: Britain should have compensated us first!


By
Costa
Nkomo

Speaking
at
the
Zimbabwe
National
Elders
Forum
at
State
House,
Mnangagwa
pointed
to
recent
apologies
from
former
colonial
powers,
including
the
UK’s
acknowledgement
of
the
Mau
Mau
in
Kenya
and
Germany’s
reparations
to
the
Herero,
Nama,
and
Mbanderu
peoples
of
Namibia.

As
his
government
prepares
to
compensate
former
landowners
for
enhancements
on
their
farms,
Mnangagwa
questioned
why
the
British,
who
originally
seized
the
land
from
Zimbabweans,
have
not
offered
similar
apologies
or
reparations.

The
ZNEF
seeks
to
leverage
the
knowledge
and
expertise
of
its
members
to
enhance
national
development
and
inform
policy
formulation.

“We
have
observed
that
former
colonial
powers,
like
the
United
Kingdom,
recently
apologised
to
the
Mau
Mau
of
Kenya,
and
Germany
has
also
expressed
regret
to
the
Mbanderu,
Herero,
and
Nama
people
of
Namibia.
Therefore,
we
ask:
when
will
the
rest
of
us
in
former
colonies
receive
similar
apologies?
We
wonder,”
he
stated.

His
comments
underscore
the
complex
and
often
overlooked
history
of
land
ownership
in
Zimbabwe.

Mnangagwa
added,
“While
my
administration
has
been
forthright
in
accommodating
compensation
for
former
white
farmers
regarding
improvements
on
the
farms
redistributed
by
the
state,
we
cannot
ignore
the
cries
of
our
people
for
justice.
Thus,
the
government
has
placed
substantial
value
on
the
journey
that
the
Elders
Forum
has
embarked
upon
through
this
proposed
study.
In
retrospect,
it
is
the
colonial
powers
that
should
have
compensated
Zimbabwe
first,
allowing
our
country
to
use
part
of
those
reparations
to
compensate
former
white
farmers
for
their
improvements.”

He
emphasized
that
national
healing
would
not
be
complete
without
the
empathy
extended
to
those
farmers.

Mnangagwa’s
remarks
resonated
with
the
Elders
Forum,
whose
Chairman,
Reverend
Felix
Mukonowengwe,
echoed
the
sentiment:
“The
people
who
were
removed
from
their
fertile
lands
have
not
been
compensated,
and
there
has
been
no
voice
to
say
we
are
sorry.
We
are
here
to
tell
Zimbabwe
and
the
world
that
these
people
must
be
compensated
somehow.”

While
Mnangagwa’s
government
is
making
reparations
to
white
farmers,
the
President
himself
appears
to
be
questioning
the
very
foundation
of
the
land
reform
process.

In
the
quest
for
national
healing,
the
complexities
of
history
and
the
lingering
grievances
of
the
dispossessed
demand
a
deeper
examination
of
the
injustices
that
have
shaped
Zimbabwe’s
land
landscape.

Musk Gets Tossed Back To PA State Court In Lottery Case, Just In Time For Election – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Apu
Gomes/Getty
Images)

Elon
Musk
will
get
away
with
it.

The
world’s
richest
man
will
dole
out
several
more
thinly
disguised
bribes
in
an
attempt
to
sway
the
election
results,
and
he
will
face
no
consequences.
But
he
did
get
unceremoniously
chucked
back
to
state
court
by
Judge
Gerald
Pappert,
who
flicked
the
thin-skinned
billionaire
aside
like
a
bit
of
noxious
pet
dander
clinging
to
his
judicial
robes

which
is
something
anyway.

The
case
involved
a

civil
action

by
Philadelphia
District
Attorney
Larry
Krasner,
who
is
seeking
to
enjoin
Musk
from
engaging
in
an
illegal
lottery
through
daily
giveaways
to
registered
voters
who
sign
a
petition
pledging
“support
for
the
First
and
Second
Amendments.”

Musk
has
been
stumping
for
Donald
Trump
across
Pennsylvania,
donating
upwards
of
$130
million
to
support
the
former
president’s
campaign,
even
as
he
rails
against
interference
by
philanthropist
George
Soros.


Judge
Angelo
Foglietta
of
the
Philadelphia
Court
of
Common
Pleas
ordered
Musk
to
appear
in
Court
on
Thursday
morning,
but
by
then
the
case
had
been
removed
to
federal
court,
where
it
landed
on
Judge
Pappert’s
docket.


Musk’s

theory
of
jurisdiction

is
that,
while
the
DA’s
complaint
is
nominally
about
violating
Pennsylvania’s
consumer
protection
laws,
it
really
pertains
to
the
election,
and
thus
presents
an
important
federal
question.
He
made
an
equally
inscrutable
argument
that
the
DA
is
acting
in
his
personal
capacity
as
a
citizen
of
Pennsylvania,
and
thus
there
is
diversity
between
the
parties.
This
requires
ignoring


Moor
v.
Alameda
County
,
411
U.S.
693,
717
(1973),
in
which
the
Supreme
Court
held
that
“a
State
is
not
a
citizen
for
purposes
of
[]
diversity
jurisdiction.”
But
Musk
and
his
lawyers
are
up
to
the
task!

Last
night,
Krasner
filed
an

emergency
motion

to
remand
the
case
to
state
court,
pointing
out
that
the
amount
in
controversy
is

zero
dollars
,
because
the
only
relief
sought
is
injunctive,
and
noting
that
there
is
Third
Circuit
precedent
for
sanctioning
a
party
who
removes
a
case
without
any
objectively
reasonable
basis.
And
this
morning,
as
per
the
court’s
order,
Musk

responded

by
speculating
that
he

could

theoretically
be
fined,
and
so
the
court
should
simply
infer
that
the
case
meets
the
$75,000
federal
threshold.

Judge
Pappert

declined

to
make
such
an
inference,
remanding
the
case
to
state
court
because
there
is
no
federal
question
implicated
and
no
jurisdiction
for
his
court.
But
as
it
is
now
Friday,
it’s
more
or
less
impossible
that
Judge
Foglietta
will
schedule
a
hearing
and
enjoin
Musk
by
election
day.
And
so
Musk’s
gambit
to
delay
the
case
with
a
pointless
field
trip
to
the
Eastern
District
of
Pennsylvania
appears
to
have
worked.

Now
we
get
to
wait
and
see
whether
he
was
able
to
buy
enough
Pennsylvania
voters
to
put
Trump
back
in
the
White
House.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Musk Gets Tossed Back To PA State Court In Lottery Case, Just In Time For Election – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Apu
Gomes/Getty
Images)

Elon
Musk
will
get
away
with
it.

The
world’s
richest
man
will
dole
out
several
more
thinly
disguised
bribes
in
an
attempt
to
sway
the
election
results,
and
he
will
face
no
consequences.
But
he
did
get
unceremoniously
chucked
back
to
state
court
by
Judge
Gerald
Pappert,
who
flicked
the
thin-skinned
billionaire
aside
like
a
bit
of
noxious
pet
dander
clinging
to
his
judicial
robes

which
is
something
anyway.

The
case
involved
a

civil
action

by
Philadelphia
District
Attorney
Larry
Krasner,
who
is
seeking
to
enjoin
Musk
from
engaging
in
an
illegal
lottery
through
daily
giveaways
to
registered
voters
who
sign
a
petition
pledging
“support
for
the
First
and
Second
Amendments.”

Musk
has
been
stumping
for
Donald
Trump
across
Pennsylvania,
donating
upwards
of
$130
million
to
support
the
former
president’s
campaign,
even
as
he
rails
against
interference
by
philanthropist
George
Soros.


Judge
Angelo
Foglietta
of
the
Philadelphia
Court
of
Common
Pleas
ordered
Musk
to
appear
in
Court
on
Thursday
morning,
but
by
then
the
case
had
been
removed
to
federal
court,
where
it
landed
on
Judge
Pappert’s
docket.


Musk’s

theory
of
jurisdiction

is
that,
while
the
DA’s
complaint
is
nominally
about
violating
Pennsylvania’s
consumer
protection
laws,
it
really
pertains
to
the
election,
and
thus
presents
an
important
federal
question.
He
made
an
equally
inscrutable
argument
that
the
DA
is
acting
in
his
personal
capacity
as
a
citizen
of
Pennsylvania,
and
thus
there
is
diversity
between
the
parties.
This
requires
ignoring


Moor
v.
Alameda
County
,
411
U.S.
693,
717
(1973),
in
which
the
Supreme
Court
held
that
“a
State
is
not
a
citizen
for
purposes
of
[]
diversity
jurisdiction.”
But
Musk
and
his
lawyers
are
up
to
the
task!

Last
night,
Krasner
filed
an

emergency
motion

to
remand
the
case
to
state
court,
pointing
out
that
the
amount
in
controversy
is

zero
dollars
,
because
the
only
relief
sought
is
injunctive,
and
noting
that
there
is
Third
Circuit
precedent
for
sanctioning
a
party
who
removes
a
case
without
any
objectively
reasonable
basis.
And
this
morning,
as
per
the
court’s
order,
Musk

responded

by
speculating
that
he

could

theoretically
be
fined,
and
so
the
court
should
simply
infer
that
the
case
meets
the
$75,000
federal
threshold.

Judge
Pappert

declined

to
make
such
an
inference,
remanding
the
case
to
state
court
because
there
is
no
federal
question
implicated
and
no
jurisdiction
for
his
court.
But
as
it
is
now
Friday,
it’s
more
or
less
impossible
that
Judge
Foglietta
will
schedule
a
hearing
and
enjoin
Musk
by
election
day.
And
so
Musk’s
gambit
to
delay
the
case
with
a
pointless
field
trip
to
the
Eastern
District
of
Pennsylvania
appears
to
have
worked.

Now
we
get
to
wait
and
see
whether
he
was
able
to
buy
enough
Pennsylvania
voters
to
put
Trump
back
in
the
White
House.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Musk Gets Tossed Back To PA State Court In Lottery Case, Just In Time For Election – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Apu
Gomes/Getty
Images)

Elon
Musk
will
get
away
with
it.

The
world’s
richest
man
will
dole
out
several
more
thinly
disguised
bribes
in
an
attempt
to
sway
the
election
results,
and
he
will
face
no
consequences.
But
he
did
get
unceremoniously
chucked
back
to
state
court
by
Judge
Gerald
Pappert,
who
flicked
the
thin-skinned
billionaire
aside
like
a
bit
of
noxious
pet
dander
clinging
to
his
judicial
robes

which
is
something
anyway.

The
case
involved
a

civil
action

by
Philadelphia
District
Attorney
Larry
Krasner,
who
is
seeking
to
enjoin
Musk
from
engaging
in
an
illegal
lottery
through
daily
giveaways
to
registered
voters
who
sign
a
petition
pledging
“support
for
the
First
and
Second
Amendments.”

Musk
has
been
stumping
for
Donald
Trump
across
Pennsylvania,
donating
upwards
of
$130
million
to
support
the
former
president’s
campaign,
even
as
he
rails
against
interference
by
philanthropist
George
Soros.


Judge
Angelo
Foglietta
of
the
Philadelphia
Court
of
Common
Pleas
ordered
Musk
to
appear
in
Court
on
Thursday
morning,
but
by
then
the
case
had
been
removed
to
federal
court,
where
it
landed
on
Judge
Pappert’s
docket.


Musk’s

theory
of
jurisdiction

is
that,
while
the
DA’s
complaint
is
nominally
about
violating
Pennsylvania’s
consumer
protection
laws,
it
really
pertains
to
the
election,
and
thus
presents
an
important
federal
question.
He
made
an
equally
inscrutable
argument
that
the
DA
is
acting
in
his
personal
capacity
as
a
citizen
of
Pennsylvania,
and
thus
there
is
diversity
between
the
parties.
This
requires
ignoring


Moor
v.
Alameda
County
,
411
U.S.
693,
717
(1973),
in
which
the
Supreme
Court
held
that
“a
State
is
not
a
citizen
for
purposes
of
[]
diversity
jurisdiction.”
But
Musk
and
his
lawyers
are
up
to
the
task!

Last
night,
Krasner
filed
an

emergency
motion

to
remand
the
case
to
state
court,
pointing
out
that
the
amount
in
controversy
is

zero
dollars
,
because
the
only
relief
sought
is
injunctive,
and
noting
that
there
is
Third
Circuit
precedent
for
sanctioning
a
party
who
removes
a
case
without
any
objectively
reasonable
basis.
And
this
morning,
as
per
the
court’s
order,
Musk

responded

by
speculating
that
he

could

theoretically
be
fined,
and
so
the
court
should
simply
infer
that
the
case
meets
the
$75,000
federal
threshold.

Judge
Pappert

declined

to
make
such
an
inference,
remanding
the
case
to
state
court
because
there
is
no
federal
question
implicated
and
no
jurisdiction
for
his
court.
But
as
it
is
now
Friday,
it’s
more
or
less
impossible
that
Judge
Foglietta
will
schedule
a
hearing
and
enjoin
Musk
by
election
day.
And
so
Musk’s
gambit
to
delay
the
case
with
a
pointless
field
trip
to
the
Eastern
District
of
Pennsylvania
appears
to
have
worked.

Now
we
get
to
wait
and
see
whether
he
was
able
to
buy
enough
Pennsylvania
voters
to
put
Trump
back
in
the
White
House.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Musk Gets Tossed Back To PA State Court In Lottery Case, Just In Time For Election – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Apu
Gomes/Getty
Images)

Elon
Musk
will
get
away
with
it.

The
world’s
richest
man
will
dole
out
several
more
thinly
disguised
bribes
in
an
attempt
to
sway
the
election
results,
and
he
will
face
no
consequences.
But
he
did
get
unceremoniously
chucked
back
to
state
court
by
Judge
Gerald
Pappert,
who
flicked
the
thin-skinned
billionaire
aside
like
a
bit
of
noxious
pet
dander
clinging
to
his
judicial
robes

which
is
something
anyway.

The
case
involved
a

civil
action

by
Philadelphia
District
Attorney
Larry
Krasner,
who
is
seeking
to
enjoin
Musk
from
engaging
in
an
illegal
lottery
through
daily
giveaways
to
registered
voters
who
sign
a
petition
pledging
“support
for
the
First
and
Second
Amendments.”

Musk
has
been
stumping
for
Donald
Trump
across
Pennsylvania,
donating
upwards
of
$130
million
to
support
the
former
president’s
campaign,
even
as
he
rails
against
interference
by
philanthropist
George
Soros.


Judge
Angelo
Foglietta
of
the
Philadelphia
Court
of
Common
Pleas
ordered
Musk
to
appear
in
Court
on
Thursday
morning,
but
by
then
the
case
had
been
removed
to
federal
court,
where
it
landed
on
Judge
Pappert’s
docket.


Musk’s

theory
of
jurisdiction

is
that,
while
the
DA’s
complaint
is
nominally
about
violating
Pennsylvania’s
consumer
protection
laws,
it
really
pertains
to
the
election,
and
thus
presents
an
important
federal
question.
He
made
an
equally
inscrutable
argument
that
the
DA
is
acting
in
his
personal
capacity
as
a
citizen
of
Pennsylvania,
and
thus
there
is
diversity
between
the
parties.
This
requires
ignoring


Moor
v.
Alameda
County
,
411
U.S.
693,
717
(1973),
in
which
the
Supreme
Court
held
that
“a
State
is
not
a
citizen
for
purposes
of
[]
diversity
jurisdiction.”
But
Musk
and
his
lawyers
are
up
to
the
task!

Last
night,
Krasner
filed
an

emergency
motion

to
remand
the
case
to
state
court,
pointing
out
that
the
amount
in
controversy
is

zero
dollars
,
because
the
only
relief
sought
is
injunctive,
and
noting
that
there
is
Third
Circuit
precedent
for
sanctioning
a
party
who
removes
a
case
without
any
objectively
reasonable
basis.
And
this
morning,
as
per
the
court’s
order,
Musk

responded

by
speculating
that
he

could

theoretically
be
fined,
and
so
the
court
should
simply
infer
that
the
case
meets
the
$75,000
federal
threshold.

Judge
Pappert

declined

to
make
such
an
inference,
remanding
the
case
to
state
court
because
there
is
no
federal
question
implicated
and
no
jurisdiction
for
his
court.
But
as
it
is
now
Friday,
it’s
more
or
less
impossible
that
Judge
Foglietta
will
schedule
a
hearing
and
enjoin
Musk
by
election
day.
And
so
Musk’s
gambit
to
delay
the
case
with
a
pointless
field
trip
to
the
Eastern
District
of
Pennsylvania
appears
to
have
worked.

Now
we
get
to
wait
and
see
whether
he
was
able
to
buy
enough
Pennsylvania
voters
to
put
Trump
back
in
the
White
House.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Musk Gets Tossed Back To PA State Court In Lottery Case, Just In Time For Election – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Apu
Gomes/Getty
Images)

Elon
Musk
will
get
away
with
it.

The
world’s
richest
man
will
dole
out
several
more
thinly
disguised
bribes
in
an
attempt
to
sway
the
election
results,
and
he
will
face
no
consequences.
But
he
did
get
unceremoniously
chucked
back
to
state
court
by
Judge
Gerald
Pappert,
who
flicked
the
thin-skinned
billionaire
aside
like
a
bit
of
noxious
pet
dander
clinging
to
his
judicial
robes

which
is
something
anyway.

The
case
involved
a

civil
action

by
Philadelphia
District
Attorney
Larry
Krasner,
who
is
seeking
to
enjoin
Musk
from
engaging
in
an
illegal
lottery
through
daily
giveaways
to
registered
voters
who
sign
a
petition
pledging
“support
for
the
First
and
Second
Amendments.”

Musk
has
been
stumping
for
Donald
Trump
across
Pennsylvania,
donating
upwards
of
$130
million
to
support
the
former
president’s
campaign,
even
as
he
rails
against
interference
by
philanthropist
George
Soros.


Judge
Angelo
Foglietta
of
the
Philadelphia
Court
of
Common
Pleas
ordered
Musk
to
appear
in
Court
on
Thursday
morning,
but
by
then
the
case
had
been
removed
to
federal
court,
where
it
landed
on
Judge
Pappert’s
docket.


Musk’s

theory
of
jurisdiction

is
that,
while
the
DA’s
complaint
is
nominally
about
violating
Pennsylvania’s
consumer
protection
laws,
it
really
pertains
to
the
election,
and
thus
presents
an
important
federal
question.
He
made
an
equally
inscrutable
argument
that
the
DA
is
acting
in
his
personal
capacity
as
a
citizen
of
Pennsylvania,
and
thus
there
is
diversity
between
the
parties.
This
requires
ignoring


Moor
v.
Alameda
County
,
411
U.S.
693,
717
(1973),
in
which
the
Supreme
Court
held
that
“a
State
is
not
a
citizen
for
purposes
of
[]
diversity
jurisdiction.”
But
Musk
and
his
lawyers
are
up
to
the
task!

Last
night,
Krasner
filed
an

emergency
motion

to
remand
the
case
to
state
court,
pointing
out
that
the
amount
in
controversy
is

zero
dollars
,
because
the
only
relief
sought
is
injunctive,
and
noting
that
there
is
Third
Circuit
precedent
for
sanctioning
a
party
who
removes
a
case
without
any
objectively
reasonable
basis.
And
this
morning,
as
per
the
court’s
order,
Musk

responded

by
speculating
that
he

could

theoretically
be
fined,
and
so
the
court
should
simply
infer
that
the
case
meets
the
$75,000
federal
threshold.

Judge
Pappert

declined

to
make
such
an
inference,
remanding
the
case
to
state
court
because
there
is
no
federal
question
implicated
and
no
jurisdiction
for
his
court.
But
as
it
is
now
Friday,
it’s
more
or
less
impossible
that
Judge
Foglietta
will
schedule
a
hearing
and
enjoin
Musk
by
election
day.
And
so
Musk’s
gambit
to
delay
the
case
with
a
pointless
field
trip
to
the
Eastern
District
of
Pennsylvania
appears
to
have
worked.

Now
we
get
to
wait
and
see
whether
he
was
able
to
buy
enough
Pennsylvania
voters
to
put
Trump
back
in
the
White
House.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Musk Gets Tossed Back To PA State Court In Lottery Case, Just In Time For Election – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Apu
Gomes/Getty
Images)

Elon
Musk
will
get
away
with
it.

The
world’s
richest
man
will
dole
out
several
more
thinly
disguised
bribes
in
an
attempt
to
sway
the
election
results,
and
he
will
face
no
consequences.
But
he
did
get
unceremoniously
chucked
back
to
state
court
by
Judge
Gerald
Pappert,
who
flicked
the
thin-skinned
billionaire
aside
like
a
bit
of
noxious
pet
dander
clinging
to
his
judicial
robes

which
is
something
anyway.

The
case
involved
a

civil
action

by
Philadelphia
District
Attorney
Larry
Krasner,
who
is
seeking
to
enjoin
Musk
from
engaging
in
an
illegal
lottery
through
daily
giveaways
to
registered
voters
who
sign
a
petition
pledging
“support
for
the
First
and
Second
Amendments.”

Musk
has
been
stumping
for
Donald
Trump
across
Pennsylvania,
donating
upwards
of
$130
million
to
support
the
former
president’s
campaign,
even
as
he
rails
against
interference
by
philanthropist
George
Soros.


Judge
Angelo
Foglietta
of
the
Philadelphia
Court
of
Common
Pleas
ordered
Musk
to
appear
in
Court
on
Thursday
morning,
but
by
then
the
case
had
been
removed
to
federal
court,
where
it
landed
on
Judge
Pappert’s
docket.


Musk’s

theory
of
jurisdiction

is
that,
while
the
DA’s
complaint
is
nominally
about
violating
Pennsylvania’s
consumer
protection
laws,
it
really
pertains
to
the
election,
and
thus
presents
an
important
federal
question.
He
made
an
equally
inscrutable
argument
that
the
DA
is
acting
in
his
personal
capacity
as
a
citizen
of
Pennsylvania,
and
thus
there
is
diversity
between
the
parties.
This
requires
ignoring


Moor
v.
Alameda
County
,
411
U.S.
693,
717
(1973),
in
which
the
Supreme
Court
held
that
“a
State
is
not
a
citizen
for
purposes
of
[]
diversity
jurisdiction.”
But
Musk
and
his
lawyers
are
up
to
the
task!

Last
night,
Krasner
filed
an

emergency
motion

to
remand
the
case
to
state
court,
pointing
out
that
the
amount
in
controversy
is

zero
dollars
,
because
the
only
relief
sought
is
injunctive,
and
noting
that
there
is
Third
Circuit
precedent
for
sanctioning
a
party
who
removes
a
case
without
any
objectively
reasonable
basis.
And
this
morning,
as
per
the
court’s
order,
Musk

responded

by
speculating
that
he

could

theoretically
be
fined,
and
so
the
court
should
simply
infer
that
the
case
meets
the
$75,000
federal
threshold.

Judge
Pappert

declined

to
make
such
an
inference,
remanding
the
case
to
state
court
because
there
is
no
federal
question
implicated
and
no
jurisdiction
for
his
court.
But
as
it
is
now
Friday,
it’s
more
or
less
impossible
that
Judge
Foglietta
will
schedule
a
hearing
and
enjoin
Musk
by
election
day.
And
so
Musk’s
gambit
to
delay
the
case
with
a
pointless
field
trip
to
the
Eastern
District
of
Pennsylvania
appears
to
have
worked.

Now
we
get
to
wait
and
see
whether
he
was
able
to
buy
enough
Pennsylvania
voters
to
put
Trump
back
in
the
White
House.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Musk Gets Tossed Back To PA State Court In Lottery Case, Just In Time For Election – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Apu
Gomes/Getty
Images)

Elon
Musk
will
get
away
with
it.

The
world’s
richest
man
will
dole
out
several
more
thinly
disguised
bribes
in
an
attempt
to
sway
the
election
results,
and
he
will
face
no
consequences.
But
he
did
get
unceremoniously
chucked
back
to
state
court
by
Judge
Gerald
Pappert,
who
flicked
the
thin-skinned
billionaire
aside
like
a
bit
of
noxious
pet
dander
clinging
to
his
judicial
robes

which
is
something
anyway.

The
case
involved
a

civil
action

by
Philadelphia
District
Attorney
Larry
Krasner,
who
is
seeking
to
enjoin
Musk
from
engaging
in
an
illegal
lottery
through
daily
giveaways
to
registered
voters
who
sign
a
petition
pledging
“support
for
the
First
and
Second
Amendments.”

Musk
has
been
stumping
for
Donald
Trump
across
Pennsylvania,
donating
upwards
of
$130
million
to
support
the
former
president’s
campaign,
even
as
he
rails
against
interference
by
philanthropist
George
Soros.


Judge
Angelo
Foglietta
of
the
Philadelphia
Court
of
Common
Pleas
ordered
Musk
to
appear
in
Court
on
Thursday
morning,
but
by
then
the
case
had
been
removed
to
federal
court,
where
it
landed
on
Judge
Pappert’s
docket.


Musk’s

theory
of
jurisdiction

is
that,
while
the
DA’s
complaint
is
nominally
about
violating
Pennsylvania’s
consumer
protection
laws,
it
really
pertains
to
the
election,
and
thus
presents
an
important
federal
question.
He
made
an
equally
inscrutable
argument
that
the
DA
is
acting
in
his
personal
capacity
as
a
citizen
of
Pennsylvania,
and
thus
there
is
diversity
between
the
parties.
This
requires
ignoring


Moor
v.
Alameda
County
,
411
U.S.
693,
717
(1973),
in
which
the
Supreme
Court
held
that
“a
State
is
not
a
citizen
for
purposes
of
[]
diversity
jurisdiction.”
But
Musk
and
his
lawyers
are
up
to
the
task!

Last
night,
Krasner
filed
an

emergency
motion

to
remand
the
case
to
state
court,
pointing
out
that
the
amount
in
controversy
is

zero
dollars
,
because
the
only
relief
sought
is
injunctive,
and
noting
that
there
is
Third
Circuit
precedent
for
sanctioning
a
party
who
removes
a
case
without
any
objectively
reasonable
basis.
And
this
morning,
as
per
the
court’s
order,
Musk

responded

by
speculating
that
he

could

theoretically
be
fined,
and
so
the
court
should
simply
infer
that
the
case
meets
the
$75,000
federal
threshold.

Judge
Pappert

declined

to
make
such
an
inference,
remanding
the
case
to
state
court
because
there
is
no
federal
question
implicated
and
no
jurisdiction
for
his
court.
But
as
it
is
now
Friday,
it’s
more
or
less
impossible
that
Judge
Foglietta
will
schedule
a
hearing
and
enjoin
Musk
by
election
day.
And
so
Musk’s
gambit
to
delay
the
case
with
a
pointless
field
trip
to
the
Eastern
District
of
Pennsylvania
appears
to
have
worked.

Now
we
get
to
wait
and
see
whether
he
was
able
to
buy
enough
Pennsylvania
voters
to
put
Trump
back
in
the
White
House.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Musk Gets Tossed Back To PA State Court In Lottery Case, Just In Time For Election – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Apu
Gomes/Getty
Images)

Elon
Musk
will
get
away
with
it.

The
world’s
richest
man
will
dole
out
several
more
thinly
disguised
bribes
in
an
attempt
to
sway
the
election
results,
and
he
will
face
no
consequences.
But
he
did
get
unceremoniously
chucked
back
to
state
court
by
Judge
Gerald
Pappert,
who
flicked
the
thin-skinned
billionaire
aside
like
a
bit
of
noxious
pet
dander
clinging
to
his
judicial
robes

which
is
something
anyway.

The
case
involved
a

civil
action

by
Philadelphia
District
Attorney
Larry
Krasner,
who
is
seeking
to
enjoin
Musk
from
engaging
in
an
illegal
lottery
through
daily
giveaways
to
registered
voters
who
sign
a
petition
pledging
“support
for
the
First
and
Second
Amendments.”

Musk
has
been
stumping
for
Donald
Trump
across
Pennsylvania,
donating
upwards
of
$130
million
to
support
the
former
president’s
campaign,
even
as
he
rails
against
interference
by
philanthropist
George
Soros.


Judge
Angelo
Foglietta
of
the
Philadelphia
Court
of
Common
Pleas
ordered
Musk
to
appear
in
Court
on
Thursday
morning,
but
by
then
the
case
had
been
removed
to
federal
court,
where
it
landed
on
Judge
Pappert’s
docket.


Musk’s

theory
of
jurisdiction

is
that,
while
the
DA’s
complaint
is
nominally
about
violating
Pennsylvania’s
consumer
protection
laws,
it
really
pertains
to
the
election,
and
thus
presents
an
important
federal
question.
He
made
an
equally
inscrutable
argument
that
the
DA
is
acting
in
his
personal
capacity
as
a
citizen
of
Pennsylvania,
and
thus
there
is
diversity
between
the
parties.
This
requires
ignoring


Moor
v.
Alameda
County
,
411
U.S.
693,
717
(1973),
in
which
the
Supreme
Court
held
that
“a
State
is
not
a
citizen
for
purposes
of
[]
diversity
jurisdiction.”
But
Musk
and
his
lawyers
are
up
to
the
task!

Last
night,
Krasner
filed
an

emergency
motion

to
remand
the
case
to
state
court,
pointing
out
that
the
amount
in
controversy
is

zero
dollars
,
because
the
only
relief
sought
is
injunctive,
and
noting
that
there
is
Third
Circuit
precedent
for
sanctioning
a
party
who
removes
a
case
without
any
objectively
reasonable
basis.
And
this
morning,
as
per
the
court’s
order,
Musk

responded

by
speculating
that
he

could

theoretically
be
fined,
and
so
the
court
should
simply
infer
that
the
case
meets
the
$75,000
federal
threshold.

Judge
Pappert

declined

to
make
such
an
inference,
remanding
the
case
to
state
court
because
there
is
no
federal
question
implicated
and
no
jurisdiction
for
his
court.
But
as
it
is
now
Friday,
it’s
more
or
less
impossible
that
Judge
Foglietta
will
schedule
a
hearing
and
enjoin
Musk
by
election
day.
And
so
Musk’s
gambit
to
delay
the
case
with
a
pointless
field
trip
to
the
Eastern
District
of
Pennsylvania
appears
to
have
worked.

Now
we
get
to
wait
and
see
whether
he
was
able
to
buy
enough
Pennsylvania
voters
to
put
Trump
back
in
the
White
House.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Musk Gets Tossed Back To PA State Court In Lottery Case, Just In Time For Election – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Apu
Gomes/Getty
Images)

Elon
Musk
will
get
away
with
it.

The
world’s
richest
man
will
dole
out
several
more
thinly
disguised
bribes
in
an
attempt
to
sway
the
election
results,
and
he
will
face
no
consequences.
But
he
did
get
unceremoniously
chucked
back
to
state
court
by
Judge
Gerald
Pappert,
who
flicked
the
thin-skinned
billionaire
aside
like
a
bit
of
noxious
pet
dander
clinging
to
his
judicial
robes

which
is
something
anyway.

The
case
involved
a

civil
action

by
Philadelphia
District
Attorney
Larry
Krasner,
who
is
seeking
to
enjoin
Musk
from
engaging
in
an
illegal
lottery
through
daily
giveaways
to
registered
voters
who
sign
a
petition
pledging
“support
for
the
First
and
Second
Amendments.”

Musk
has
been
stumping
for
Donald
Trump
across
Pennsylvania,
donating
upwards
of
$130
million
to
support
the
former
president’s
campaign,
even
as
he
rails
against
interference
by
philanthropist
George
Soros.


Judge
Angelo
Foglietta
of
the
Philadelphia
Court
of
Common
Pleas
ordered
Musk
to
appear
in
Court
on
Thursday
morning,
but
by
then
the
case
had
been
removed
to
federal
court,
where
it
landed
on
Judge
Pappert’s
docket.


Musk’s

theory
of
jurisdiction

is
that,
while
the
DA’s
complaint
is
nominally
about
violating
Pennsylvania’s
consumer
protection
laws,
it
really
pertains
to
the
election,
and
thus
presents
an
important
federal
question.
He
made
an
equally
inscrutable
argument
that
the
DA
is
acting
in
his
personal
capacity
as
a
citizen
of
Pennsylvania,
and
thus
there
is
diversity
between
the
parties.
This
requires
ignoring


Moor
v.
Alameda
County
,
411
U.S.
693,
717
(1973),
in
which
the
Supreme
Court
held
that
“a
State
is
not
a
citizen
for
purposes
of
[]
diversity
jurisdiction.”
But
Musk
and
his
lawyers
are
up
to
the
task!

Last
night,
Krasner
filed
an

emergency
motion

to
remand
the
case
to
state
court,
pointing
out
that
the
amount
in
controversy
is

zero
dollars
,
because
the
only
relief
sought
is
injunctive,
and
noting
that
there
is
Third
Circuit
precedent
for
sanctioning
a
party
who
removes
a
case
without
any
objectively
reasonable
basis.
And
this
morning,
as
per
the
court’s
order,
Musk

responded

by
speculating
that
he

could

theoretically
be
fined,
and
so
the
court
should
simply
infer
that
the
case
meets
the
$75,000
federal
threshold.

Judge
Pappert

declined

to
make
such
an
inference,
remanding
the
case
to
state
court
because
there
is
no
federal
question
implicated
and
no
jurisdiction
for
his
court.
But
as
it
is
now
Friday,
it’s
more
or
less
impossible
that
Judge
Foglietta
will
schedule
a
hearing
and
enjoin
Musk
by
election
day.
And
so
Musk’s
gambit
to
delay
the
case
with
a
pointless
field
trip
to
the
Eastern
District
of
Pennsylvania
appears
to
have
worked.

Now
we
get
to
wait
and
see
whether
he
was
able
to
buy
enough
Pennsylvania
voters
to
put
Trump
back
in
the
White
House.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.