Legal Disclaimer
You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.
The Ripples Behind The SPAC Wave - Corporate/Commercial Law
mondaq.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from mondaq.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Increased Regulatory Scrutiny Of Private Funds - Finance and Banking
mondaq.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from mondaq.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
file a motion to quash. that is filed with the district court and court of appeals. a subpoena for live testimony has never been tested in court as to a president of the united states. there is a lot of language, articles and precedent against that. so he could do it, mueller. he could fail. it would take a lot of time and that really hurts mueller if he loses. i think it does because as long as the subpoena battle is open he will not want to say i closed the investigation. it will take a long time. although i think that the outcome is that mueller will win, we don t know. there is always litigation risks. so here is the other thing. the issue of the president wanting to do an interview. there are different schools of thought, him saying it as bs or means it. he has said it. here is what he said. are you going to talk to mueller? i m looking forward to it,
reporter: three judges don t agree and we might note the third was a george w. bush appointee and that is a republican president so this is not partisan. he is saying you have 90 days to tell me with regard to criminality, jeff sessions and the department of justice in the past and even recently has said this has to do with the issue of national security and protecting and securing the border. we are talking about 690,000 individuals who are within our borders who we know we don t have the means or finances to deport. to constantly say congresses and passing it, of course they haven t passed it because they constantly have other line items like the wall attached to such pieces of legislation. here s more of what the judge said, neither the meager legal reasoning or the assessment of litigation risks were provided by dhs to support the decision cigarette of daca, sustained