The Rule O' Law Roundup: April 5, 2026

And a screaming fox

Good Afternoon:

I was awakened this morning at 4:30 am by a screaming.

At first, I thought it was a person. When I was awake enough to get my wits about me, I realized it was an animal of some kind. It didn’t sound like the yowling of a cat. Kleio the dog was mesmerized by it, stood on the bed, and barked at the window.

I glanced out of my window and saw this red fox. I assume it was a female in heat, because it didn’t seem injured or otherwise in distress. It was strolling about the driveway, sniffing at things and, well, screaming. If you’ve never heard a fox scream, join the club. Neither had I. It’s loud.

I snapped a picture out of my window at some distance with my phone and went back to sleep. Despite the use of various sharpening tools, the darkness and the distance make the focus, well, soft—to put it politely.

At any rate, this screaming fox is today’s #BeastOfTheDay.

---

The Rule O’ Law Roundup—April 5, 2026

• New York Times v. DoD (D.D.C. 1:25-cv-04218, Senior Judge Paul Friedman)

Rather to my surprise, Judge Friedman has not ruled yet in the week’s big compliance standoff between the New York Times and the Department of Identity Crisis. On March 20, Friedman found that the Pentagon’s press credentialing policy—which required reporters to pledge not to gather “unauthorized” information and threatened credential revocation—violated the First and Fifth Amendments. And he ordered reinstatement of seven Times reporters and all other credentialed reporters. The Pentagon’s response? It closed the correspondents’ corridor, exiled the press to an annex outside the building, required escorts for all Pentagon entry, and issued a revised policy that attempts to accomplish many of the objectives that Judge Friedman had already struck down. At a March 30 compliance hearing, Judge Friedman expressed evident skepticism—“Is it Catch-22? Is it Kafka? What’s going on here?”—after learning reporters’ new credentials allegedly granted them access to a library reachable only by means of a corridor or shuttle bus they weren’t authorized to use without an escort. A supplemental declaration from a Pentagon official claimed reporters could reach the library on foot, by rideshare, or by shuttle bus. And the Pentagon disputes the Times’s claim that there is no direct access for reporters. Friedman took the matter under submission; but as of this afternoon, no written order has issued. I suspect this means he is writing something substantial.

• Here’s the docket.

• Here’s the March 20 opinion.

• Here’s the Pentagon’s supplemental declaration.

• Here’s Lawfare’s hearing dispatch by the estimable Molly Roberts.

• And here’s the Columbia Journalism Review coverage: “Pushed Out. Reinstated. Pushed Out Again.” (Apr. 2)