About
What qualifies me as an email deliverability expert? Good question! Here's the answer:…
Services
Activity
3K followers
-
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. shared thisWEEKLY GOOD NEWS ROUNDUP FROM THE FRONT - 4/4/26 Here’s a recap of all of the good things that have happened over the past week or so in our battle to defend our country from the ravages of the current administration, and to turn this ship around! - COURT DOUBLE-SPANKS ADMINISTRATION OVER SHENANIGANS RELATING TO UNLAWFUL TERMINATION OF VETERANS ADMINISTRATION UNION CONTRACT! - AN 6 RAISES ITS UGLY HEAD BUT IN A BEAUTIFUL WAY: COURT HOLDS TRUMP NOT IMMUNE FOR CERTAIN ACTS FUELING JAN 6! - COURT ORDERS DHS TO *REINSTATE* THE STATUS OF NEARLY 1MILLION IMMIGRANTS WHOSE STATUS TRUMP HAD TERMINATED! - COURT PROTECTS ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT! 🐆🐟🦤 - COURT *HALTS* CONSTRUCTION OF WHITE HOUSE BALLROOM AFTER GIVING PLAINTIFFS THE ROADMAP TO SUCCESS - COURT RULES THAT TRUMP'S DEFUNDING OF NPR AND PBS IS ILLEGAL!! Read all of these articles here (for free): https://lnkd.in/gUKpcnpr
-
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. shared thisJUDGE ISSUES *PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION* HALTING THE GOVERNMENT'S BLOCKING THE USE OF ANTHROPIC!! As you probably know, Anthropic took a hard stand against the government using Anthropic's AI, Claude, for either surveillance of Americans, or for guiding fully autonomous weapons. In retaliation a) Trump decreed that *every* federal agency would immediately block Anthropic from *ever* having another government contract, and b) Hegseth announced that anyone wanting to do business with the federal government must *immediately* sever any business relationship that they have with Anthropic. Finally, the government designated Anthropic as a "supply chain risk". That, according to the Court, is a label "that applies to adversaries of the U.S. government who may sabotage its technology systems." Judge Rita Lin of the Northern District of California *swiftly* tamped this dumpster fire out saying, among other things: "The balance of equities and public interest therefore decisively favor Anthropic. As already discussed, the financial and reputational harm that Anthropic is experiencing as a result of the likely unlawful Challenged Actions risk crippling the company. In addition, amici have credibly described significant harms to the public interest if injunctive relief is denied. A brief submitted by military leaders warns that the Challenged Actions “will materially detract from military readiness and operational safety.” Employees from other major companies in the AI field explain that the Challenged Actions threaten to “chill open deliberation” and “professional debate” amongst the people best positioned to understand AI technology and its potential for “catastrophic misuse.” A nonprofit advocacy group for small developers explains that their members are particularly vulnerable to sudden, large changes in government procedures, and the confusion and ambiguity created by the Challenged Actions will impose significant costs on them. For all these reasons, the balance of equities and public interest favor Anthropic." Keep reading: https://lnkd.in/gFHwR5eD
-
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. shared thisGuys, I'm doing my best to find the actual text of the jury verdict that came out today in the case against Meta and Google. But in the meantime I discovered that the Daily Journal piece in which I was featured *about this case*, and *also*, additionally, the piece that I authored for the Daily Journal about the issue generally, have both now had the paywalls lowered! Woot! (The Daily Journal is a legal publication.) Here are the links: Article about this case: https://lnkd.in/gf5d7SzC Article about that I authored about the issue generally: https://lnkd.in/gf4jdHBi
-
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. shared thisSUPREME COURT 9-0 SAYS INTERNET PROVIDERS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR USERS' MISDEEDS Yay! I get to report on a case that draws on my background as an Internet law and policy attorney! The Supreme Court *just* issued its opinion in the Cox (the Internet provider) case. And it's a beaut! And, again, a *9-0* decision!! (Included for Notes from the Front members.) First, for nearly *30 years*, ever since the passage of the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) way back in *1998*, it has been the case that Internet providers have what is known as a "safe harbor" when it comes to their users violating copyright. Basically, so long as they do something about the copyright-violating user once it's brought to their attention, the Internet provider can't be held legally liable for the acts of that user. For example, if, while logged in to their Cox Internet services, one of Cox' customers - let's call him Fred - downloads a pirated version of a song, Cox is *not* legally responsible for that. Now, if it is brought to Cox' attention that Fred was using Cox' services to illegally download that song, and if Cox does nothing about it, now Cox has knowledge and is *allowing* it. (Fun fact: This is very similar to the Federal law that I wrote having to do with merchants who have affiliates and whose affiliate advertise the merchant through spam. If the merchant doesn't know that their affiliates are spamming, well, they don't know. But once it is brought to their attention that the affiliate is advertising the merchant through spam then that merchant is on the hook for the spam *as if the merchant themselves hit 'send' on that spam*!) Anyways, the DMCA has always provided this safe harbor for Internet providers, such as Cox, since 1998. Well, Sony, Warner Music Group, Universal Music Group, and several other labels don't like this. So they sued Cox saying that because, when they notified Cox of infringing behaviour on the part of Cox' users, Cox didn't hop to it to their satisfaction, that Cox was a) contributorily liable (meaning they were affirmatively contributing to the infringement), and/or b) vicariously liable (meaning they benefited from it even though they were just passively contributing to it). Isn't it cool how in the law you can argue X and/or Y? :~) Well, the lower court clearly was not well-versed in Internet law and policy, because the lower court found for Sony on both theories. Keep reading: https://lnkd.in/gxAUxmFm
-
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. shared thisWEEKLY GOOD NEWS ROUNDUP FROM THE FRONT - 3/21/26 Here’s a recap of all of the good things that have happened over the past week or so in our battle to defend our country from the ravages of the current administration, and to turn this ship around! *Reminder: The full pdfs of all of the documents discussed below are permanently available to Notes from the Front members in the archives. Not a member yet? Join me to access all documents, our private chat, our private dropbox including all the Epstein files (even the disappeared ones), and more.. Plus your $5 a month helps support my efforts grabbing, purchasing, explaining, and storing documents before they can be disappeared (much of which I have to pay for out of my own pocket. You can join me right here, and start accessing the assets and chatting with our amazing folks right away! https://lnkd.in/gsP7PCER Read the weekly recap now, here (it’s public and free): https://lnkd.in/gJ_VKC5x
-
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. shared thisBREAKING!! COURT ISSUES INJUNCTION AGAINST ADMINISTRATION'S "YOU'VE GOT A NICE SNAP PROGRAM HERE, COLORADO, IT'D BE A SHAME IF ANYTHING HAPPENED TO IT" Today the Federal Court for the District of Colorado issued a preliminary injunction, enjoining the Trump administration from forcing Colorado to take part in a "pilot project" in order to continue to receive certain SNAP funds, and to not be penalized by the withholding of SNAP funds. This lawsuit, originally filed in October of 2025, actually started out as a lawsuit fighting Trump's efforts to move Space Force out of Colorado. However in January of this year Colorado amended its complaint after receiving a letter advising it that it must comply with a new pilot project related to SNAP. That letter, dated December 17th, 2025, gave Colorado just *30 days* to recertify "all SNAP households in Arapahoe, Adams, Jefferson, Boulder, and Douglas counties," *including* "by accounting for the income and resources of any excluded household members, conducting in-person interviews, and using federal eligibility tools like the improved, cost-free Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) Program database." And of course Colorado had to preserve documentation of all of its efforts, and the data associated therewith, the implicit threat being that Colorado could be required to turn over all of that data to the administration. It then went on to say that "Failure to participate in this pilot project as specified by USDA will trigger noncompliance procedures," could affect Colorado's participation in SNAP, and then *had the cheek* to close with "Thank you for your continued work to help address the needs of vulnerable Americans." Fortunately, our awesome AG, Phil Weiser, was right on it, and filed an amended complaint to the original Space Force lawsuit, which was a great way to get this issue into the Court quickly, not to mention to bring to the same judge's attention what *else* the administration was pulling. In a lovely 52-page opinion and order (included for Notes from the Front members along with a copy of the administration's 'pilot project' (code name "Screw Colorado") letter), Judge Jackson snapped right back (see what I did there?) at the administration, granting a preliminary injunction prohibiting the administration from enforcing the pilot project, and also forbidding the administration from "taking any adverse action against Colorado for its refusal to comply with any of the demands of the Recertification Letter." Keep reading: https://lnkd.in/gu-dRgny
-
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. shared thisJUDGE ORDERS TRUMP TO TURN OVER DOCUMENTS USED TO JUSTIFY "COMPLETE REBUILDING" OF KENNEDY CENTER This past Saturday (yes, on the *weekend*) a Federal judge ordered Trump (the named defendant) and the administration to turn over documents that are being used to justify shutting down the Kennedy Center for two years, in order to conduct, and I quote, a "complete rebuilding" of the Kennedy Center. (Full opinion and order included for Notes from the Front members.) Here's what's going on: There are two types of trustees on the board of trustees of the Kennedy Center: those that are appointed by the president, and then those which are appointed by the statute creating the Kennedy Center (known as "ex officio" board members). The ex officio board members are designated by *position* (such as the "Mayor of D.C.", etc.), and include seats for Congressional representatives. Congresswoman Joyce Beatty is a representative from Ohio who fills one of those positions, in other words she is an ex officio member of the Kennedy Center board of trustees. For the most part, ever since the founding of the Kennedy Center (originally named the National Cultural Center and established in 1958) the ex officio board members have been considered voting members, and have in fact voted on Kennedy Center board business. That all changed when Trump appointed himself to the board, replaced certain board members, had himself voted chairman, and tried to change the name of the Kennedy Center by adding his name (only Congress can do that). At the end of a meeting in December, which Beatty was attending remotely, "to Beatty’s surprise, it was announced at the end of the meeting that Board would vote on whether to add Trump’s name to the Kennedy Center title. Beatty tried to voice her opposition to the announcement, but found herself involuntarily muted." Unable to unmute herself, "The Board took a vote and declared the result “unanimous”: The Center would be renamed." So on December 22, 2025, Beatty filed a lawsuit challenging the renaming of the Kennedy Center. But there was another surprise in store for Beatty and others: Trump's announcement on February 1st that he would be closing the Kennedy Center for two years for "complete rebuilding". Beatty wrote to Trump asking to see the documents on which Trump was relying in order to justify the closure and rebuilding, including, for example, expert reports, contracts, a list of the performance contracts that would be impacted by the closure, etc.. The silence was deafening. Keep reading: https://lnkd.in/gJ6He7Ae
-
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. posted thisExactly six years ago this month I went into medical isolation because we knew that Covid could trigger the always-fatal version of my rare immune condition. At the time I was hopeful, even certain, that a sterilizing vaccine (meaning it would stop you from getting Covid at all) would be developed within 5 years. Well, here it is, six years later, and no sterilizing vaccine, and I'm still medically isolating. One day in March of 2020 I was a person who was out dancing several times a week (ballet, ballroom, and to live music), with a vibrant social life, and the next day my life instantly contracted and became unimaginably smaller. But almost as instantly I pivoted. I started a Facebook group for others who had to medically isolate because of Covid. I created a website listing medical providers and other businesses who were "Covid safe" for those of us who are at high risk. I adapted to this new way of life. And so when 2025 hit, I knew what I had to do and I was, by pure serendipity, perfectly situated to do it; I had the knowledge, I had the know-how, and I had nowhere else to be. And that's how Covid launched my efforts to explain the facts from the front of the battle to save the soul of our democracy, and to explain for people what is going on in the courts with all the lawsuits against this administration. I always say that the difference between coincidence and opportunity is what you do with it. And, oh yeah, to quote that most excellent movie, Robots, "See a need, fill a need."
-
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. shared thisGOOD NEWS FROM THE FRONT WEEKLY ROUNDUP - 3/14/26 Here’s a recap of all of the good things that have happened over the past week or so in our battle to defend our country from the ravages of the current administration, and to turn this ship around! In this week's recap: COURT GIVES GLORIOUS 130-PAGE SPANKING TO THE ADMINISTRATION! COURT HOLDS KARI LAKE HAD AND HAS NO AUTHORITY AND ALL HER ACTIONS ARE VOID! HUGE SPANKING QUASHES SUBPOENAS THAT TRUMP’S DOJ SENT TO THE FEDERAL RESERVE! AND YOU’LL NEVER GUESS WHO IS THE JUDGE! Read either here: https://lnkd.in/gRB6hVfc Or here: https://lnkd.in/g5a6WvSA
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. replied to a comment
3d
Josh Nelson While I personally believe the law says otherwise, and have discussed the same with FTC attorneys, it is generally 'understood' that political email is exempt from all of the niceties of the law.
-
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. reacted on thisI’m grateful to be included alongside five of my Shook partners in Lawdragon’s 2026 500 Global Leaders in Crisis Management. It is humbling and inspiring to be counted in the same group as the top crisis management lawyers across the country and around the globe. Thank you to Lawdragon for this recognition, and to my Shook partners and entire team for the collaboration and support that make this kind of work possible.Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. reacted on thisSix Shook Partners have been selected for the 2026 Lawdragon 500 Global Leaders in Crisis Management. This second edition highlights the top 500 advisors who are the legal world’s emergency responders. “They are best in class in the emerging practice of our times – in which crisis is a daily drumbeat and surviving to fight again the goal,” wrote Lawdragon. The recognized partners are Jan Dodd (Litigation, Strategic Counseling), Eben Flaster (Litigation, Strategic Counseling, Product Liability), Judge Kimberly Priest Johnson (Litigation, Strategic Counseling, Investigations), Patrick Oot (Litigation, Strategic Counseling, Investigations), Jennifer Stevenson (Litigation, Strategic Counseling, Risk Management) and Steven Weisburd (Litigation, Strategic Counseling). = LEARN MORE = Firm News | https://lnkd.in/gF2RastS Jan | https://lnkd.in/gwW5pwah Eben | https://lnkd.in/gJu63Y9a Kimberly | https://lnkd.in/gywuawS4 Patrick | https://lnkd.in/dEv6zpjj Jennifer | https://lnkd.in/gfrrYFrn Steven | https://lnkd.in/gc-6WBSw
-
Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. reacted on thisAnne P. Mitchell, Esq. reacted on thisA week from now will be my 30th anniversary of being a professional writer (as in you write something and you get paid for it.) Yes, the first payment was $23 for writing Factsheet Five reviews, BUT IT WAS MONEY! 😂
Experience & Education
-
Notes from the Front
View Anne P.’s full experience
See their title, tenure and more.
or
Licenses & Certifications
Volunteer Experience
-
Founder
Preventing School Shootings.com
- Present 12 years 5 months
Children
Nobody is born a school shooter. They are made. And as such, they have common socioacademic factors in their background. Each of us, as experts in our respective fields, have come together united by this one overriding realization: identify the common factors, and you have a chance at identifying youth who are at risk for becoming school shooters, and intervening before it gets to that point.
Our group includes expertise in law, boys in society, behavioral psychology, law enforcement…Nobody is born a school shooter. They are made. And as such, they have common socioacademic factors in their background. Each of us, as experts in our respective fields, have come together united by this one overriding realization: identify the common factors, and you have a chance at identifying youth who are at risk for becoming school shooters, and intervening before it gets to that point.
Our group includes expertise in law, boys in society, behavioral psychology, law enforcement, and behavioral profiling.
As a group, we are committed to determining these common socioacademic factors that previous school shooters shared, through investigation that includes not only analyzing data, but going out in the field and interviewing those who knew previous school shooters best – parents, teachers, classmates, and others who interacted with them on a regular basis. With this information we are creating a model of what youths who share these common factors look like, and in particular what it looks like when a youth has a predisposition, when confronted with this constellation of factors, to go down the school shooting path.
In turn, this information, will be provided to schools and other institutions, to aid school psychologists, administrators, and teachers to identify these at-risk youths, so that they can intervene, and get them off that path. Before the shooting starts. -
Founder/Organizer
DushanbeRelief.org
- 5 months
Disaster and Humanitarian Relief
Organizer
Honors & Awards
-
Phi Beta Kappa
Phi Beta Kappa
Test Scores
-
LSAT
Score: 99th Percentile
-
ASVAB (Armed Services Vocational Apptitude Battery)
Score: 99th Percentile
Languages
-
Spanish
-
Organizations
-
Colorado Cyber Consortium
-
- Present -
California Bar Association Cyber Law Committee
-
- Present
Recommendations received
15 people have recommended Anne P.
Join now to viewOther similar profiles
Explore more posts
Explore top content on LinkedIn
Find curated posts and insights for relevant topics all in one place.
View top content