Trump Gets a Bull Durham Lesson

The lesson in the movie Bull Durham is Never Call the Umpire a C%$#sucker.

When Trump disparaged (I would argue threatened) Federal Judge James Robart after he issued an injunction against his attempted Muslim ban, it was clear that no one in the Judiciary would be happy with this.

The 9^th Circuit of Appeals ruled against rescinding the injunction, and what is significant is that they did so in a per curiam opinion.  (Note that the crack reporters at the Times somehow missed this.)

A per curiam opinion is unanimous, but it is also unsigned, and except in extremely rare cases (Corrupt Supreme Court Justices covering their asses in Bush v. Gore), it means something very specific.

To quote Scotusblog, "Traditionally, the per curiam opinion was used to signal that a case was uncontroversial, obvious, and did not require a substantial opinion."

In other words, it's a way to say, "Your Kung Fu is weak, and you are stinking up the place."

I think that the appellate court would have ruled in much the same way, and probably unanimously, had Trump not called out Judge Robart, but I think that it did so as a per curiam ruling was a message to the Trump as to what constitutes appropriate behavior with regard to the judiciary.

The only question is whether Trump will learn from this.  (I'm guessing that he won't)

The standard disclaimer applies here, I am an engineer, not a lawyer, dammit.<sup>*

*</sup>I love it when I get to go all Dr. McCoy!