Judicial snark: Telco immunity version

(H/t to emptywheel)

In Re: NSA telecommunications records litigation

The judge's option cites the plaintiff's argument (and question):

Do defendants mean to assert their theory of unfettered presidential power over matters of national security - the very theory plaintiffs seek to challenge in this case - as a basis for disregarding this court’s FISA preemption ruling and defying the current access proceedings under section 1806(f)? So it seems.

To which Judge Walker adds:

So it seems to the court also.

Snark!

And he goes on:

It appears from defendants’ response to plaintiffs’ motion that defendants believe they can prevent the court from taking any action under 1806(f) by simply declining to act.

[snip]

For the reasons stated herein, defendants’ motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment (Doc #475/49), is DENIED.

Not nearly snarky enough, for my tastes - but snark nonetheless.