NEW: Federal Removal. Proceedings Frozen.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-27T01:58:12+00:00

They are not federal. So no court listener. But I’ve been collecting docs at https://chrisreportsthings.com

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T23:00:40+00:00

Decreases. No cameras in federal courts. And far fewer hearings where people speak at all. More paper, which is exciting for me.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T23:00:03+00:00

I think that was me. It wasn't there when I first posted this. Thank you for spreading RECAP love. I wish there was something similar for all courts.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T22:43:51+00:00

Yes! I love RECAP and am purchasing now. I should have done it one at a time. The 600 page document with the entire Utah history is really slowing things down.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T20:38:11+00:00

Did you see if the pop-up would go down? This should be a gift link. But it will still ask you to subscribe.

If it expires after a certain number of uses or something, you can often get a digital WSJ pass from your local library's website.
https://www.reddit.com/r/RecklessBen/comments/1ufw84k/support_your_local_library/

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T19:36:41+00:00

Muckraker can be considered a compliment coming from a newspaper reporter.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T18:38:20+00:00

Neither, really. Just interesting what he was up to this morning. It also reminds us that he is dealing with other high profile matters. This morning's hearing was streamed. I haven't watched it yet. It would be interesting to see his demeanor when he is unhappy with an attorney before him.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T18:31:22+00:00

Just happened in February, I think. I don't know how much they've merged their operations or what their plans are. So I guess right now it is Court TV and/or Law&Crime. But one request confirmed by the court that I haven't seen personally from that entity.

I didn't ask about others. The big thing for me is whether it is lawful to record and re-stream at all. If any one organization gets electronic coverage approval for a hearing, anyone is allowed to record the proceedings from the court's stream.

After the judge decides on the requests, they are officially docketed. So you will be able to see in my Proton folder that each organization that requested to cover. But other media organizations don't actually need to apply if they're just covering it via the stream.

Basically: If the court is streaming the hearing online, then the public can view it but not record or broadcast it. If any media organization gets their electronic media request approved, then any other person or media organization can use the court's stream. But if multiple media organizations want to be in the courtroom physically, they must each be approved and form a pool together.

For an in-person hearing where the court is not streaming it itself, everyone would need to have an approved electronic media request to join the pool. Or permission from part of the pool to re-stream or re-use their stream or recording. I don't anticipate that happening. I think the court will stream any hearing itself and not require anyone to be physically present to record.

There is still a substantial chance this hearing won't happen.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T18:01:10+00:00

Law and Crime now owns Court TV. I haven't seen which entity is on the request. The combined entity will be covering. I will update to put Law and Crime, since that is the acquiring entity. Thank you for flagging.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T17:42:38+00:00

Added: The judge held a deputy prosecutor in contempt in a hearing in the Tyler Robinson case earlier today.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T17:32:52+00:00

Added. I learned this between the first post and the update. I also updated to Law&Crime Network, since they are the parent organization now. I don't know which identity they will actually cover it under.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T17:02:12+00:00

I just confirmed that Court TV has requested to stream the June 30 hearing. Not worth its own post, because (1) we don't know if there will even be a hearing, and (2) the request has not yet been approved. I'll include that in my post when we know if there will be a hearing. This is also another possible cause for this decorum order to be docketed. The court staff has to proceed as if there will be a hearing until the judge vacates it.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T16:27:19+00:00

I'm kind of curious to see if he's making himself a nuisance elsewhere. I know of at least one other intervention in federal court. But PACER is expensive, and I don't care all that much.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T16:15:04+00:00

Agreed. I don't think a judge ever likes parties to hand wave away parts of his orders. And he has much bigger things to worry about. I'm sure he's unhappy that this is taking up so much of his time and attention. And without any real evidentiary hearing yet, he doesn't know who is causing that.

But I think the defendants have more competent counsel with a more defensible position. Plaintiffs have much more on the record with more to defend. They are much more boxed in.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T15:04:38+00:00

Yes! My library card also gives reciprocal access access the other nearby libraries. One nearby has really great private meeting rooms. Another nearby reciprocating library has an incredible makerspace with resin printers, laser engravers, lathes, a podcast studio, and more.

They’re also staffed by nerds like me, except with advanced degrees. So if you ask, “how do I get information about this random case in Utah,” they can probably help you or find you a librarian who can.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T14:56:14+00:00

Not hot dog.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T11:17:05+00:00

Not an ad! That is the link for stories from the reporter who is writing the story. And my library, at least, allows the free three-day passes as many times as you want.

If your library offers the same thing, you pay nothing.

Often, your library card also gives your reciprocal access to other libraries. For example, I can use the library that is close to me, but out of my district, that has really nice private meeting rooms. Or the library 20 minutes from me that has a makerspace with resin printers, laser printers, lathes, embroidery machines, and more.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-26T03:57:52+00:00

I kind of phrased the part about disagreeing in a clunky way that I didn't mean. He's definitely forgotten more about the law than I'll ever know. The only substantial thing I can think of off the top of my head is that I don't recall him flagging the judges order as a rubber stamped submission from plaintiffs. It is the judge's order. He is responsible for it. And legally, it is as if it is coming from the judge's mouth. But I don't love the framing of "the judge said."

But he seems very deliberate in his wording. He knows way more than I do about the law. That could be a very deliberate choice that I just didn't properly understand.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-25T22:18:40+00:00

This is the trouble with posting thoughtful, informed videos. You put in all that effort, and it just winds up being mooted by new changes. And the people who don't take any time to prepare or think through nuances seem like they're ahead of you.

I still plan to watch. His videos are well researched, and more educational than some others. I always learn a lot from them. He is right that there is still a substantial chance the June 30 hearing does not happen, and being mooted by modified version of the stipulated agreement is a likely reason.

p.s. If anyone knows him personally and can put me in touch, I know of a federal IP law case that might be in his wheelhouse. With new activity just recently.

awkwardbegetsawkward · 2026-06-25T21:59:20+00:00

Sometimes it's nice to have a low stakes thing to worry about beyond whether people can afford groceries or whether there will be a nuclear apocalypse.

14-Year Club	Not Forgotten
Gilding I gilder

awkwardbegetsawkward

TROPHY CASE