I’m always on the fence with these subpoena resistance cases.
On the one hand, it’s Twitter, Elon, and Epstein related. Fuck all of them.
On the other hand, I don’t think that businesses should just blindly turn over information because the DOJ managed to find a judge that would rubber stamp a subpoena. Obviously that’s not every subpoena, or even likely a large number of them in the grand scheme, but it happening even once is too much to take it at face value being justified.
For the life of me I don’t understand your argument here. You’re basically advocating for the destruction of the justice system? So if I try to sue a company for say bodily injury or something they should be able to hide all the evidence? Good lord don’t corporations have enough power as is? Why give them more?
I think they’re saying Elon sucks and be wary of trusting the government.
The fed’s anti-encryption stance comes to mind. “We need backdoors in your messaging apps but it’s just to protect the children!”
Both of these have been true for a looong time. Any step to concede this point is complicit.
This subpoena has nothing to do with the DOJ. This subpoena was issued as part of discovery in the civil defamation case between the two women in the article
Most likely what I think is happening here is X literally does not have the records that are being subpoenaed, because why keep records when you’re trying to destroy a business?
