Chivayo Rejects Mandiwanzira Claims About Gairezi Hydropower Project

Speaking
at
a
recent
ZANU-PF
rally,
Mandiwanzira
said
that
if
Chivayo
had
built
the
dam
and
hydro-power
plant
as
expected,
local
communities
would
have
benefited
through
jobs
and
increased
tourism.

However,
in
a
post
on
his
social
media
pages
on
Wednesday,
21
January,
Chivayo
said
the
Gairezi
30MW
Hydro
Project
was
not
awarded
to
him
personally.

He
said
the
tender
was
given
to
a
consortium
led
by
a
multi-billion-dollar,
Indian
government-owned
engineering
company.
Said
Chivayo:

“The
tender
for
the
Gairezi
30
MW
Hydro
Project
was
not
awarded
to
‘CHIVAYO’
personally,
but
to
a
consortium
led
by
an
Indian
Multi-billion
dollar
Government-owned
engineering
conglomerate,
BHEL
(Bharat
Heavy
Equipment
Limited
),
working
together
with
Angelique
International
Ltd,
while
Intratrek
Zimbabwe
(Pvt)
Ltd
participated
as
their
local
contractor.

“Like
many
local
contractors
across
Africa,
Intratrek
rides
on
the
CREDIBILITY,
bankability
and
TECHNICAL
CAPACITY
of
international
OEM
partners
in
order
to
achieve
project
delivery.

“In
this
case,
that
international
credibility
was
precisely
what
made
the
consortium
competitive
and
to
be
awarded
the
tender
as
the
LOWEST
compliant
bidder
to
specification.”

Chivayo
said
the
project
could
not
proceed
because
of
its
high
cost,
which
he
estimated
at
US$113
million. He
said:

“The
fundamental
issue
that
prevented
implementation
was
challenges
in
achieving
FINANCIAL
CLOSURE.

“The
project
cost
was
USD
113
million
for
30MW,
which
made
the
business
case
extremely
DIFFICULT
to
finance
when
tested
against
the
lenders’
requirements
of
Return
on
Investment,
yield,
asset
return,
plant
load
factor,
and
overall
BANKABILITY.

“In
simple
terms,
it
is
not
enough
to
have
a
technically
feasible
hydro
power
plant.

“Financiers
must
be
satisfied
that
the
project
has
sustainable
CASHFLOWS
and
repayment
security.

“Unfortunately,
the
FINANCIAL
MODEL
struggled
to
meet
that
threshold.”

Chivayo
said
he
lost
money
on
the
project,
even
though
it
never
took
off,
due
to
the
costly
and
lengthy
bidding
process,
which
required
frequent
international
travel
to
original
equipment
manufacturers,
mainly
in
India
and
other
countries,
before
the
final
tender
submission. He
said:

“It
is
also
important
for
both
you
and
the
general
public
to
understand
how
projects
like
this
actually
work.

“Before
any
DISBURSEMENT
is
made,
there
are
strict
project
finance
requirements
such
as
Letters
of
Credit,
Advance
Payment
Guarantees,
Performance
Guarantees,
supplier
guarantees,
OEM
confirmations
and
technical
milestones
such
as
Factory
Acceptance
Tests
and
inspections
for
key
equipment.

“As
Contractors,
we
even
incur
substantial
UPFRONT
COSTS
during
the
cumbersome
bidding
process
for
international
travel
to
OEMs,
often
in
India
and
elsewhere
overseas,
before
the
final
tender
submission.

“So
if
anything,
Contractors
also
get
DISAPPOINTED
when
projects
stall,
because
we
invest
real
money
and
expect
a
return
out
of
it.

“We
are
always
ready
to
execute
because
the
more
we
CONSTRUCT
and
commission
projects,
the
more
we
EARN
through
fairly
reasonable
margins.”

Chivayo
said
he
received
no
payment
from
ZESA
for
the
Gairezi
project,
as
ZESA,
through
the
government,
prioritised
high-yield
power
generation
projects
such
as
Hwange
Units
7
and
8. He
wrote:

“It
is,
however,
understandable
that
in
this
case,
ZESA,
through
Government,
ultimately
prioritised
high-yield
generation
projects
such
as
Hwange
Units
7
&
8,
which
gave
a
total
output
of
600MW
after
project
execution
and
commissioning.

“In
simple
terms,
suffice
it
to
say
this
explains
why
the
Gairezi
project
and
others
such
as
Harare
and
Munyati
Repowering
Projects
were
held
in
abeyance.

“I
therefore
respectfully
acknowledge
your
concerns
as
an
Hon.
Member,
and
I
look
forward
to
the
project
being
REVISITED
by
the
government
and
the
most
ideal
funding
structure
being
considered
for
its
development.

“I
hope
this
clarification
assists
the
public
to
understand,
and
all
those
making
SPECULATIVE
comments
suggesting
that
payments
were
made,
should
also
be
respectfully
guided
accordingly.”

Hello? Yes, This Is Me Speaking – See Also – Above the Law

Florida
AG
Makes
Himself
A
Request
He
Couldn’t
Refuse:
Really
strange
way
to
honor
Martin
Luther
King
Jr.
ICE
Circulated
A
Secret
Memo
That
Tells
Agents
To
Bypass
The
Whole
“Warrant”
Thing:
Thanks
to
SCOTUS
rulings,
there
isn’t
much
recourse
if
they
barge
in
either.
Win
Your
Judicial
Races
The
Normal
Way,
Folks:
That
means
no
attempts
to
extort
the
competition!
Noticing
Truth
Social
Doesn’t
Make
It
Official:
Nor
does
not
replying
count
as
process.
You
Have
To
Work
To
Get
Trial
Experience:
Some
advice
and
preparation
will
get
you
where
you
need
to
be.
On
This
Week
Of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer:
Word
to
the
wise,
don’t
flirt
too
hard
in
North
Carolina!

Big Victory For Don Lemon And His Lawyer – Above the Law

Don
Lemon
(Photo
by
Dia
Dipasupil/Getty
Images)



Ed.
Note:

Welcome
to
our
daily
feature

Trivia
Question
of
the
Day!


The
Department
of
Justice’s
attempt
to
indict
journalist
Don
Lemon
for
his
reporting
on
anti-ICE
protests
in
Minnesota
was
reportedly
blocked
by
federal
magistrate
judge.
What
well-known
defense
attorney
represents
Lemon
in
the
matter?


Hint:
In
a
statement
his
lawyer
said,
“The
magistrate’s
reported
actions
confirm
the
nature
of
Don’s
First
Amendment
protected
work
this
weekend
in
Minnesota
as
a
reporter.
It
was
no
different
than
what
he
has
done
for
more
than
30
years,
reporting
and
covering
newsworthy
events
on
the
ground
and
engaging
in
constitutionally
protected
activity
as
a
journalist.”
Which,
naturally,
is
a
stark
contrast
to
the
Attorney
General’s
reaction,
according
to
reports,
the
AG
is
“enraged
at
the
magistrate
judge’s
decision.”



See
the
answer
on
the
next
page.

Litera Brings Agentic AI to Mobile with New iOS App for Litera One Platform

Litera
today
launched
an
iOS
mobile
app
for

Litera
One
,
its
AI-enabled
legal
platform,
extending
its
agentic
AI
capabilities
to
iPhone
and
iPad
devices
with
what
the
company
describes
as
“true
two-way
continuity”
between
desktop
and
mobile
environments.

The
app
addresses
a
practical
challenge
facing
lawyers
who
need
to
maintain
productivity
across
multiple
devices
and
locations.
Work
started
in
Microsoft
Word,
Outlook,
or
the
Litera
One
web
interface
can
be
picked
up
on
mobile
devices
without
losing
context
or
requiring
users
to
restart
tasks
or
re-run
analyses,
Litera
says.

“Lawyers
need
to
stay
productive
whether
they’re
traveling,
moving
between
meetings,
or
preparing
to
walk
into
a
client
conversation,”
said

Pasquale
Colella
,
vice
president
of
global
SaaS
operations
at
Litera.
“With
Litera
One
Mobile,
that
continuity
is
seamless.”

What
the
App
Offers

The
iOS
app
provides
access
to
Litera’s
agentic
AI
agent,

Lito
,
with
support
for
several
core
legal
workflows:

  • Conversational
    AI
    with
    text
    and
    speech-to-text
    input
    for
    queries
    and
    workflow
    initiation.
  • Document
    review
    capabilities
    with
    structured,
    actionable
    outputs.
  • Document
    comparison
    using
    Litera’s
    established
    Compare
    technology
    for
    AI-powered
    analysis,
    summarization,
    and
    risk
    identification.
  • Business
    development
    tools
    for
    creating
    client
    summaries
    and
    updates.

“Users
can
ask
questions,
run
workflows,
review
outputs,
compare
documents
and
even
dictate
hands-free
queries
while
on
the
move
without
losing
secure
access
to
firm-specific
documents,
data
or
workflows,”
Litera
says.

The
app
maintains
secure
access
to
firm-specific
documents,
data
and
workflows,
allowing
lawyers
to
review
extracted
terms,
risk
insights,
key
findings
and
playbook
outputs
while
on
the
move.

By
offering
users
the
ability
to
access
its
AI
agent
through
a
mobile
app,
Litera
says
that
Lito
stands
out
from
other
AI
platforms,
which
largely
remain
web-
or
desktop-only.

“Litera
One
delivers
that
capability
at
true
enterprise
workflow
depth

so
lawyers
can
continue
reviewing
documents,
asking
questions
and
moving
work
forward
wherever
they
are,
without
losing
context
or
momentum.”

New
Support
for
French-Canadian

Alongside
the
mobile
launch,
Litera
announced
it
has
added
French-Canadian
language
support
within
Microsoft
Word
in
Litera
One.

Legal
professionals
can
now
use
the
interface
in
French
Canadian
and
work
with
French
Canadian
documents,
asking
questions
and
generating
insights
in
their
native
language.

The
Litera
One
mobile
app
is
available
now
via
the
Apple
App
Store.

ICE Can Bust Into Houses Without Warrants Based On Memo So Cool And Legal They Keep It Hidden – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Stephen
Maturen/Getty
Images)

Immigration
and
Customs
Enforcement
reportedly
created
an
internal
memo
asserting

that
its
agents
can
enter
people’s
homes
to
make
arrests
without
a
judicial
warrant
.
And
the
memo,
we
are
assured,
is
extremely
chill
and
very
constitutional,
which
is
why
ICE
refused
to
widely
distribute
it
and
told
some
of
those
who
did
see
it
that
they
had
to
view
it
in
the
presence
of
their
supervisor
and
couldn’t
take
notes.
Nothing
suspicious
about
that!

The
Fourth
Amendment
provides
that
“no
Warrants
shall
issue,
but
upon
probable
cause,
supported
by
Oath
or
affirmation.”
In
practice,
this
has
meant
that
law
enforcement
needs
a
judicial
warrant
to
enter
private
property
without
permission…
barring
exigent
circumstances,
like
someone
inside
being
in
immediate
danger.
A
judicial
warrant,
as
the
name
suggests,
involves
a
judge
signing
off
on
it.
By
contrast
an
“administrative
warrant”
has
someone
in
the
executive
branch
sign
off
on
it.


The
May
12
memo
(at
Exhibit
1)
,
disclosed
through

Whistleblower
Aid

and
signed
by
Acting
ICE
Director
Todd
Lyons,
announces
that
agents
can
forcibly
enter
homes
based
solely
on
administrative
warrants.
If
Homeland
Security
has
gotten
a
removal
order

which
could
be
from
an
official
as
low
on
the
pecking
order
as
an
immigration
judge

then
an
immigration
officer
can
go
ahead
and
issue
an
I-205
authorizing
agents
to
go
get
the
person…
and
now,
for
the
first
time,
they
claim
that
form
is
all
it
takes
for
the
government
to
overcome
the
Fourth
Amendment.
So,
to
be
clear,
these
aren’t
even
issued
by
immigration
judges…
they’re
from
the
ICE
equivalent
of
desk
sergeants:

Although
the
U.S.
Department
of
Homeland
Security
(DHS)
has
not
historically
relied
on
administrative
warrants
alone
to
arrest
aliens
subject
to
final
orders
of
removal
in
their
place
of
residence,
the
DHS
Office
of
the
General
Counsel
has
recently
determined
that
the
U.S.
Constitution,
the
Immigration
and
Nationality
Act,
and
the
immigration
regulations
do
not
prohibit
relying
on
administrative
warrants
for
this
purpose.

As
an
attorney,
you

know

you’re
on
the
right
track
when
your
conclusion
runs
counter
to
practice
“historically”
and
involves
“recently”
realizing
the
Constitution
has
a
meaning
that
no
one
else
ever
thought
of
in
all
the
years
since
1791.
You
can
be
even
more
confident
in
your
conclusion
when
you
don’t
cite
A
SINGLE
CASE
for
this
proposition.
And
the
cherry
on
top
is
when
your
bosses
make
sure
the
memo

addressed

to
“All
ICE
Personnel”
stays
so
hidden
that
it
can
only
be
found
where
the
government
keeps
its
darkest
secret
documents
like
Area
51
or
Mar-a-Lago’s
pool
locker.

According
to
the
whistleblowers,
ICE
pointedly
did
not
revise
their
actual
training
materials.
So
anyone
who
looked
would
see
ICE
telling
agents
that
they
can’t
enter
a
home
without
a
real
warrant
while
behind-the-scenes
instructing
their
people…
the
exact
opposite.

And
so
we
have
Department
of
Homeland
Security
lawyers
issuing
novel
constitutional
law
opinions
hopped
up
on
Red
Bull
and
Chick-fil-A
on
one
side
and
anyone
who
has
ever
watched
10
minutes
of

Law
&
Order

on
the
other.
Professor
Orin
Kerr,
who
is
enjoying
the
busiest
week
in
Fourth
Amendment
news
in
years,

weighs
in
:

The
standard
view
has
been
that
administrative
warrants
can’t
authorize
home
entry
because
they’re
executive
branch
orders,
and
the
executive
branch
can’t
be
in
charge
of
deciding
whether
to
give
itself
a
warrant. 
Under Payton
v.
New
York
,
445
U.S.
573
(1980)
,
the
government
needs
an
arrest
warrant
to
enter
a
home
to
make
an
arrest. 
But Payton refers
to
a
“judicial
officer”
inserting
his
judgment
“between
the
zealous
officer
and
the
citizen,”
and
the
immigration
officer
who
signs
a
Form
I-205
is
not
a
“judicial
officer.”
That’s
the
traditional
thinking.

The
whole
point,
as
the
Supreme
Court
has
explained
in
cases
like


Coolidge
v.
New
Hampshire

(1971),
is
that
“prosecutors
and
policemen
simply
cannot
be
asked
to
maintain
the
requisite
neutrality
with
regard
to
their
own
investigations.”
This
concern
is
supercharged
when
the
administration
has

publicly
embarked
on
an
immigration
judge
purge
,
threatening
anyone
exercising
independence
and
replacing
them
with
stooges
and
rendering
suspect
even
the
underlying
removal
orders
behind
these
warrants.

Professor
Kerr
hypothesizes
that
DHS
attorneys
might
be

because,
again,
they
cite
zilch
for
this
conclusion

relying
on
dicta
from
1960
for
this.
And
if
they
are,
he’s
not
particularly
persuaded:

If
that’s
the
DHS
argument—and
I’m
just
speculating
about
that—I
think
the
problem
on
the
merits
is
that
there’s
been
a
lot
of
water
under
the
bridge
since
Justice
Frankfurter’s
opinion
in Abel.  Coolidge from
1971
and Shadwick from
1972
settled
the
idea
that
a
warrant
requires
a
neutral
and
detached
magistrate. Payton from
1980
settled
that
a
judicial
warrant
is
needed
for
entry. 
To
go
back
to
the
1960
opinion
in Abel, and
to
read
its
dicta
as
binding
without
considering
the
Supreme
Court’s
later
holdings
in CoolidgeShadwick,
and Payton,
seems
pretty
problematic.

So
it’s
probably
“wrong”
but
maybe
“not
frivolous.”
Cold
comfort
for
folks
having
their
doors
rammed
in.

And
doors
are
definitely
getting
rammed.
The
AP
report
notes
that
ICE
officers
broke
through
the
front
door
of
a
Liberian
man’s
Minneapolis
home
on
January
11,
wearing
tactical
gear
armed
with
rifles
and
an
administrative
warrant.

DHS
spokesperson
Tricia
McLaughlin
defended
the
policy
by
saying
everyone
served
with
these
warrants
has
“had
full
due
process
and
a
final
order
of
removal
from
an
immigration
judge.”
Which
might
be
true!
ICE
has
been
repeatedly
caught
mistakenly
nabbing
U.S.
citizens.
But
let’s
give
the
DHS
propaganda
minister
the
benefit
of
the
doubt
and
assume
they’ve
only
busted
into
houses
with
administrative
warrants
when
they’ve
been

sure

someone
inside
is
subject
to
a
removal
order…
it’s
still
beside
the
point.
The
due
process
question
is
separate
from
the
Fourth
Amendment
question
of
whether
the
government
can
break
into
your
home
without
taking
it
to
an
independent
judge.
Customarily
lawyers
learn
that
before
they
set
out
to
vibe-check
the
Bill
of
Rights.

Not
that
anyone
can
do
much
about
it,
according
to
Kerr:

It
seems
worth
flagging,
though,
that
this
is
another
place
where
the
Supreme
Court’s
gradual
cutting
back
on
the
scope
of
the Bivens remedy—the
civil
action
against
federal
agents
for
violating
the
Constitution,
including
the
Fourth
Amendment—may
make
the
most
obvious
form
of
judicial
review
unavailable.
Even
if
the
policy
is
unconstitutional,
as
it
seems
to
be,
a
person
who
is
illegally
searched
probably
can’t
sue
ICE
for
violating
their
constitutional
rights.

Yet
another
reminder
that
the
courts
have

more
or
less
written
abusive
government
agents
a
blank
check
.
The
system
is
working
exactly
as
intended.
Just
not
for
any
of
us.

But
just
because
it’s
practically
unlikely
to
be
enforced
doesn’t
make
it
legal.
The
Constitution
does
not
contain
a
secret
footnote
that
says,
“Unless
immigration,
lol.”

No
wonder
they
wanted
to
keep
this
thing
hidden.


Immigration
officers
assert
sweeping
power
to
enter
homes
without
a
judge’s
warrant,
memo
says

[AP]

Can
ICE
Enter
a
Home
to
Make
an
Arrest
With
Only
an
Administrative
Warrant?

[Lawfare]




HeadshotJoe
Patrice
 is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer
.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or

Bluesky

if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a

Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search
.

Judicial Candidate Learns The Hard Way That Extortion Is Not A Campaign Strategy – Above the Law

“Messy,”
in
the
wild
drama
sense,
is
not
a
typical
adjective
when
describing
a
judicial
election
but
that’s
the
exact
right
word
for
what’s
been
going
down
in
the
Democratic
primary
for
Houston’s
234th
Civil
District
Court
judgeship.
The
race
featured
dueling
injunction
requests
and
a
late-night
hearing
which
ultimately
culminated
in
a
would-be
challenger
getting
booted
from
the
ballot.

Incumbent
Judge
Lauren
Reeder
was
successful
in
getting
Kimberly
McTorry
off
the
ballot,
with
Judge
Christi
Kennedy

writing
,
“This
conduct
renders
McTorry
administratively
ineligible
to
be
certified
as
a
candidate
for
judicial
office.”
What
conduct
you
ask?
Well,
buckle
up.

According
to
Reeder’s
court
filings,
McTorry
allegedly
tried
to
strong-arm
her
into
dropping
out
of
the
race
by
threatening
to
expose
personal
information
that
would
“get
back
to
[your]
husband,
children
and
other
family
members.”
That
information?
A
two-month
consensual
affair
in
2013
between
Reeder
and
AZA
Law
partner
Todd
Mensing.

Now,
the
relationship
ended
more
than
a
decade
ago,
but
that
didn’t
allegedly
stop
McTorry
from
trying
to
use
it
against
Reeder.
It
should
also
be
noted
Mensing
later
appeared
in
Reeder’s
courtroom.
Reeder
did
not
recuse
herself,
a
fact
McTorry
seized
upon.

Reeder
alleged
that
McTorry’s
demand
she
drop
out
of
the
race
was
paired
with
the
use
of
a
co-conspirator
to
publish
what
Reeder
described
as
“vile,
offensive”
social
media
posts
designed
to
amp
up
the
pressure.
McTorry
denied
the
allegations,
but
Kennedy
found
her
testimony
“not
credible,”
particularly
given
the
timing
of
the
posts,
which
the
court
said
was
“unlikely
to
be
a
coincidence.”

Kennedy
also
found
that
some
of
the
signatures
McTorry
submitted
to
qualify
for
the
ballot
were
forged
and/or
obtained
from
suspended
voters.

But
remember
there
were
dueling
efforts
to
get
folks
kicked
off
the
ballot.
And,
well,
McTorry’s
effort
didn’t
go
nearly
as
well.
She
alleged
Reeder
violated
Texas
election
law
by
“effectuating”
a
$50,000
donation
from
a
law
firm
to
McTorry,
supposedly
in
exchange
for
McTorry
dropping
out
of
the
race
and
seeking
a
different
judgeship.

Judge
Kennedy
rejected
that
claim
outright,
calling
McTorry’s
filings
riddled
with
“materially
false
allegations”
about
bribery
or
coercion.
The
court
found
no
evidence
supporting
the
theory
that
Reeder
tried
to
buy
her
opponent
out
of
the
race.

Reeder’s
attorney,
Lloyd
Kelly,

summed
it
up
bluntly
,
“This
is
a
historic
case.
It
is
drawing
the
line
that
you
cannot
campaign
for
a
position
on
the
ballot
as
a
judge
if
you
engage
in
what
is
basically
extortion.”
And
that
history-making
has
given
lawyers
plenty
to
gossip
about.




Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of

The
Jabot
podcast
,
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer
.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email

her

with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter

@Kathryn1
 or
Mastodon

@[email protected].

Alienating Our Affections – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Kevin
Dietsch/Getty
Images)

The
Biglaw
world
continues
to
watch
single-tier
partnerships
slip
away
with

Sullivan
&
Cromwell
joining
the
income
partner
trend
.
Will
the
industry
have
any
single-tier
firms
left
by
the
end
of
the
year?
Also
former
Senator
and
current
Hogan
Lovells
lawyer

Kyrsten
Sinema
tagged
with
an
alienation
of
affection
tort

from
her
former
bodyguard’s
soon-to-be
ex-wife.
Come
for
the
bad
soap
opera
plot,
stay
for
the
MDMA-inspired
psychedelic
trip
allegations.
Finally,

the
Supreme
Court
got
hacked
,
but
federal
law
enforcement
managed,
a
couple
years
after
the
fact,
to
track
down
the
culprit
whose
social
media
handle
was
“ihackedthegovernment.”
Cracker
jack
work
all
around.

State AG Asks For Formal Legal Opinion From Himself – Above the Law

Earlier
this
week,
Florida
Attorney
General
James
Uthmeier
dropped

an
official
opinion

declaring
that
he’s
decided
to
void
scores
of
civil
rights
laws
in
Florida
as
unconstitutional.
After
noting
that
“racial
discrimination
is
wrong”

the
first
half
of
the
time-honored,
“I’m
not
racist,

but
…”
formula

Uthmeier
launched
into
his
case
that
the
REAL
racial
discrimination
is
against
white
people.

And
by
“earlier
this
week,”
we
mean

very
specifically
on
Martin
Luther
King
Jr.
Day
.
What
a
crazy
coincidence!
Of
all
the
days
to
disrupt
the
news
cycle
with
a
targeted
message
to
white
grievance
voters,
he
chose
MLK
Day?
And
he
wasn’t
even
the
only
state
AG
to
do
this,
you
say?
Wild!

But
also,
in
an
act
of
bureaucratic
auto-eroticism,
Uthmeier
issued
the
opinion
based
on
a
formal
request
from…
himself.
“Therefore,
I
requested,
and
I
am
now
giving,
an
official
opinion
in
writing
on
a
question
of
law
relating
to
my
official
duties,”
Uthmeier
wrote
in
a
section

flagged
on
social
media
by
reporter
Jason
Garcia
.
“As
Florida’s
chief
legal
officer,
the
constitutionality
of
laws
that
seek
to
mandate
discrimination
based
on
race
relates
to
my
official
duties
as
Attorney
General.”


Are
those
voices
in
the
room
with
us
right
now,
James?

Florida
law
provides
that
the
state’s
AG
must
provide
legal
opinions
“on
the
written
requisition
of
the
Governor,
a
member
of
the
Cabinet,
the
head
of
a
department
in
the
executive
branch,”
and
legislative
leadership.
The
authors
of
that
law
probably
never
considered
the
possibility
that
a
grandstanding
attorney
general,
as
a
member
of
the
cabinet,
would
try
to
get
high
on
their
own
supply
of
legal
opinions.
The
law
is
modeled
on
an
attorney-client
dynamic:
someone
asks
the
state’s
official
lawyer
and
the
state’s
lawyer
answers.

Self-dealing
is,
of
course,
a
hallmark
of
modern
GOP
politics,
so
rather
than
wait
for
a
client
request,
Uthmeier
gave
himself
a
little
treat
for
MLK
Day,
managing
to
get
taxpayers
to
pay
for
an
anti-affirmative
action
campaign
stunt.
On
that
note,
the

Daily
Wire
claims
it
“first
obtained”
the
opinion
,
lest
there
be
any
doubt
that
this
is
just
pre-buttered
culture
war
content.
For
those
not
keeping
score,
last
year
Uthmeier
tried
to
piggyback
off
the
Trump
administration’s
assault
on
Biglaw
by

using
his
office
to
scold
law
firms
for
having
vague
“DEI”
policies
.

Because
there’s
no
other
reason
for
this
opinion.
In
a
normal,
ethically
sound
world,
a
state
attorney
general
would
respect
that
attorney-client
framework
and
wait
for,
say,
Governor
Ron
DeSantis
to
formally
seek
an
opinion
bashing
affirmative
action.
Or,
if
Uthmeier
insisted
upon
bringing
the
request
of
his
own
volition,
the
office
would
commission
some
right-wing
law
firm
or
law
professor
to
paper
up
a
tidy
memo.
As

a
former
Jones
Day
associate
,
Uthmeier
certainly
knows
where
to
find
some
Federalist
Society
veterans
to
DoorDash
over
some
half-hearted
originalism.

The
problem
with
following
standard
procedure
is
sharing
credit.
No
matter
how
strident
the
opinion
Uthmeier
might
write,
people
would
credit
DeSantis
for
ordering
the
opinion.
And
no
matter
how
much
Uthmeier
might
stress
that
he
requested
it,
he
couldn’t
control
the
campaign
rhetoric
of
an
opinion
farmed
out
to
a
law
firm.
With
this
move
he
can
have
his
cake
and
make
sure
it’s
not
decorated
by
any
minority-owned
businesses
too.

Aside
from
presenting
warmed-over
conservative
legal
philosophy
tropes
like
“The
way
to
stop
discrimination
on
the
basis
of
race
is
to
stop
discriminating
on
the
basis
of
race”

a
line
that
must
hit
hard
if
you’re
stupid

the
opinion
doesn’t
really

do

much.
The
statutes
remain
on
the
books
and
courts
will
ultimately
decide
whether
they
stay
there.
And,
if
you’re
betting
your
mortgage
on
the
prediction
markets,
you
could
do
worse
than
assuming
the
Supreme
Court
finally
snuffs
out
the
legacy
of
the
civil
rights
movement.
Until
then,
the
job
of
the
state
attorney
general
is
to
enforce
the
laws
the
other
branches
have
created.

Even
if
he
wanted
to
push
the
walls
of
the
separation
of
powers
and
refuse
to
enforce
the
law,
nothing
about

that

decision
would
require
an
announcement
either.
This
was
just
a
blog
post
on
official
letterhead.

And
if
Florida’s
opinion
was
a
message
board
post,
Texas
AG
Ken
Paxton
used
the
holiday
to
uncork
a
self-important
Substack
screed.
As
opposed
to
Florida’s
six
pages
of
argument,
Paxton
used
Dr.
King’s
holiday
for


a
74-page
digital
doorstop

railing
against
all
manifestations
of
DEI.
Has
Paxton
never
heard
that
brevity
is
the
soul
of
bigotry?

At
least
Uthmeier
had
the
decency
to
ask
himself
permission
in
a
legally
themed
Sméagol
and
Gollum
act.
Paxton
doesn’t
even
trifle
with
the
legal
onanism
of
requesting
his
own
opinion
and
just
throws
his
taxpayer-funded
office
into
a
holiday
assault
on
racial
diversity
to
suck
up
headlines
just
in
time
for
his
contentious
Senate
primary
fight
against
the
comparatively
moderate-framed
John
Cornyn.
Federalist
Papers,
revisionist
history
about
Reconstruction,
obligatory
claims
that
MLK
believed
in
a
“color-blind”
society…
this
thing
has
it
all.
Now
that’s
a
law
school
gunner
in
action!

No
matter
how
they
justified
it,
taking
the
unilateral
step
of
releasing
racial
grievance
rants
on
Martin
Luther
King
Day
is
clown
behavior.
It’s
performative
politics
at
its
most
toxic,
where
records
and
accomplishments
are
secondary
to
making
sure
the
public
understands
exactly
who
is
willing
to
take
it
upon
themselves
to
post
up
in
that
proverbial
schoolhouse
door.




HeadshotJoe
Patrice
 is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer
.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or

Bluesky

if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a

Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search
.

Zambia, Zimbabwe ignore climate change risks, proceed with hydro project on drying Zambezi River

The
governments
of
Zambia
and
Zimbabwe
are
brushing
aside
concerns
about
the
worsening
effects
of
climate
change,
with
the
two
southern
African
nations
recently
pledging
$220
million
each
in
seed
capital
for
the
construction
of
the
Batoka
Gorge
Hydro
Electric
Scheme
(BGHES).

The
decision
by
the
two
countries
to
commit
the
$440
million

about
10
per
cent
of
the
project’s
expected
cost
of
$4.5
billion

was
taken
at
a
December
29,
2025
meeting
of
the
Council
of
Ministers
of
the
Zambezi
River
Authority
(ZRA),
the
bi-national
body
that
manages
water
resources
on
the
shared
river.
The
ZRA
will
manage
the
proposed
project,
just
as
it
already
manages
the
bi-national
Kariba
Dam
and
its
hydropower
station.

The
$440
million
is
intended
to
improve
the
project’s
bankability
and
attract
private
investors.
Funding
has
previously
been
one
of
the
major
obstacles
faced
by
the
project.


A
2,400-megawatt
hydropower
project

Located
on
River
Zambezi,
a
short
distance
from
the
Victoria
Falls
on
the
border
between
Zambia
and
Zimbabwe,
the
BGHES
plant
has
a
design
power-generating
capacity
of
2,400
megawatts
(MW).
Once
completed,
it
is
expected
to
supply
1,200
MW
to
each
country,
helping
boost
electricity
supplies
for
two
countries
currently
experiencing
severe
power
cuts.

The
project
was
first
conceived
in
1972
but
has
remained
on
the
drawing
board,
with
several
false
starts
over
the
decades.
However,
as
climate
change
increasingly
affects
southern
Africa

making
the
region
drier
due
to
erratic
rainfall
and
increased
evapotranspiration
driven
by
rising
temperatures

water
levels
on
the
Zambezi
River
have
been
declining.
This
has
led
to
serious
misgivings
about
the
long-term
viability
of
the
hydropower
project.

The
Zambezi
is
Africa’s
sixth-largest
river.
It
originates
in
Zambia
and
flows
through
Angola,
Namibia,
Botswana,
Zimbabwe
and
Mozambique.
Two
major
dams
lie
on
the
river:
Lake
Kariba,
shared
by
Zambia
and
Zimbabwe,
and
Cahora
Bassa,
downstream
in
Mozambique.
Hydropower
plants
on
both
dams

with
a
combined
capacity
of
3,800
MW

have
in
recent
years
been
affected
by
climate
change-related
low
water
levels.

Power
generation
at
Kariba

downstream
from
the
proposed
project
site

was
halted
in
2022
and
2024,
due
to
low
water
levels.
Generation
was
also
reduced
at
Cahora
Bassa
in
Mozambique.
In
Zambia,
climate
change
has
not
only
affected
power
generation
on
its
plant
on
River
Zambezi,
but
also
at
three
others,
namely
Kafue
Gorge,
Lower
Kafue
Gorge
and
at
Itezhi-Tezhi.


Studies
raise
viability
questions

These
developments
reflect
projections
from
earlier
studies
that
raised
concerns
about
the
viability
of
the
BGHES.
One
study
by
researchers
at
the
University
of
Edinburgh
in
the
United
Kingdom,
which
used
the
Batoka
Gorge
scheme
as
a
case
study,
found
that
while
expanding
renewable
energy

including
hydropower

is
a
key
strategy
for
limiting
climate
change,
the
paradox
is
that
climate
change
itself
is
altering
the
availability
of
water
resources,
adversely
affecting
the
financial
viability
of
both
existing
and
planned
schemes.

The
study
assessed
the
relationship
between
climate
change
and
the
technical
and
financial
viability
of
hydropower
development,
and
the
results
were
not
encouraging.

“Simulations
with
climate
change
scenarios
illustrate
the
sensitivity
of
the
Batoka
Gorge
scheme
to
changes
in
climate,”
the
study
noted.
“They
suggest
significant
reductions
in
river
flows,
declining
power
production,
reductions
in
electricity
sales
revenue
and,
consequently,
an
adverse
impact
on
a
range
of
investment
measures.”

It
concluded
that
trends
towards
deregulation
in
the
electricity
sector
would
require
increasing
levels
of
private
investment,
which
may
not
favour
hydropower
projects.

“More
importantly,
the
very
fact
that
climate
is
changing
may
alter
the
availability
of
this
natural
resource,
and
the
impact
of
such
changes
on
the
financial
viability
of
schemes
will
be
of
particular
interest
to
investors.”
Another
study,
conducted
in
2014
by
four
researchers
focusing
on
southern
Africa,
warned
that
worsening
climate
change
would
not
only
reduce
available
water
but
also
increase
demand
for
irrigation
and
other
uses,
resulting
in
much
lower
flows
on
the
Zambezi
River.

“Accelerating
economic
growth
increases
the
potential
for
competition
for
water
between
hydropower
and
irrigated
agriculture,
and
climate
change
will
add
further
stress
to
this
system,”
the
researchers
wrote.
“The
objective
of
this
study
was
to
assess
the
vulnerability
of
major
existing
and
planned
hydropower
plants
to
changes
in
climate
and
upstream
irrigation
demand.”

“Our
results
show
that
Kariba
is
highly
vulnerable
to
a
drying
climate,
potentially
reducing
average
electricity
generation
by
12
per
cent.
Furthermore,
expansion
of
Kariba’s
generating
capacity
is
unlikely
to
deliver
expected
increases
in
production
even
under
a
favourable
climate.
The
planned
Batoka
Gorge
plant
may
also
fail
to
reach
anticipated
production
levels
outlined
in
the
original
feasibility
study.”

“This
implies
that
climate
change
and
upstream
development
must
be
explicitly
incorporated
into
both
project
planning
and
system
expansion.”


Project
proceeds
despite
risks

Despite
these
warnings,
the
governments
of
both
countries
insist
on
proceeding
with
the
project.

“Batoka
was
high
on
our
agenda,
and
we
agreed
that
the
two
governments
must
put
some
money
on
the
table
to
demonstrate
commitment,”
Zimbabwe’s
Energy
Minister
July
Moyo
said
after
the
most
recent
Council
of
Ministers
meeting.
“The
intention
is
clear

this
project
must
take
off.”
In
a
statement,
Zambia’s
Energy
Minister
Makozo
Chikote
defended
the
decision.
“Comprehensive
feasibility
studies,
including
climate
change
assessments,
confirm
that
the
Zambezi
River
can
sustainably
support
the
project,”
he
said.

“The
Batoka
Gorge
Hydro
Electric
Scheme
remains
technically
sound,
environmentally
compliant,
economically
justified
and
central
to
Zambia’s
long-term
energy
security.”

Chikote
added
that
Batoka
Gorge
is
part
of
a
sequential
hydropower
system
on
the
Zambezi
River

alongside
Victoria
Falls,
Kariba
and
future
developments

designed
to
maximise
power
generation
from
the
same
water
resource
in
line
with
international
best
practice.

ZRA
chief
executive
officer
Munyaradzi
Munodawafa
also
said
the
project
remains
viable.
“Batoka
will
serve
as
a
mitigation
measure
for
some
of
the
hydrological
challenges
at
Kariba,
while
directly
contributing
a
significant
increase
to
the
urgently
needed
power
supply
capacity
of
Zambia
and
Zimbabwe.”


Hydropower
remains
central
despite
climate
risks

Engineer
Stephen
Dihwa,
executive
director
of
the
Southern
African
Power
Pool
Coordination
Centre,
which
coordinates
regional
power
systems,
said
hydropower
would
remain
central
to
electricity
supply
despite
climate
risks.

He
noted
that
periods
of
low
rainfall
are
often
followed
by
higher
rainfall,
allowing
dams
to
refill.
“This
shows
there
is
still
a
future
for
both
existing
and
planned
hydropower
plants,”
he
said.

“What
is
required
is
plant
operation
based
on
well-forecast
hydrology
and
careful
management
of
reservoir
water
use,”
Dihwa
told Down
To
Earth
.

He
added
that
studies
are
under
way
on
reducing
the
impact
of
drought
on
hydropower
plants,
including
the
possibility
of
inter-basin
water
transfers.

Two
years
ago,
after
all
four
of
Zambia’s
hydropower
plants
were
either
severely
restricted
or
shut
down
due
to
climate
change-related
drought,
Lusaka
proposed
an
inter-basin
water
transfer
project.
It
engaged
the
Chinese
government
to
help
dig
a
300-km
canal
to
transfer
water
from
the
Luapula
River

a
tributary
of
the
Congo
River
in
the
north

to
the
Kafue
River
in
the
south,
where
two
major
hydropower
plants
are
located.

Zimbabwe’s
hydropower
generation
at
Kariba
has
also
been
severely
affected
by
poor
rains
and
the
country
is
exploring
a
1,200-km
tunnel
to
draw
around
16
billion
cubic
metres
of
water
annually
from
the
Lualaba
River
in
the
Democratic
Republic
of
the
Congo
to
Lake
Kariba.

IPCC
climate
projections
indicate
that
Central
Africa
is
likely
to
become
wetter,
while
southern
Africa
continues
to
dry.
The
two
regions
lie
in
different
river
basins.

“There
are
ways
to
reduce
the
impact
of
drought
on
hydropower
plants,
but
much
more
effort
is
needed,”
Dihwa
said.
“Studies
on
drought
resilience
in
southern
Africa
are
already
under
way
and
should
provide
practical
and
sustainable
solutions.”

“Some
solutions
are
based
on
regional
integration
and
coordinated
operation
of
plants
on
shared
watercourses.
Others
recognise
that
not
all
river
basins
are
affected
by
drought
at
the
same
time.
For
example,
the
Congo
Basin
in
the
DRC
is
relatively
less
affected,
and
ways
in
which
it
could
support
power
generation
in
other
basins
should
be
explored.”

Source:


Zambia
and
Zimbabwe
Push
Forward
with
Controversial
Hydro
Project
Amid
Climate
Concerns

Lake Kariba Weekly Levels in Meters


22.1.2026


19:46

The
Kariba
Lake
is
designed
to
operate
between
levels
475.50m
and
488.50m
(with
0.70m
freeboard)
for
hydropower
generation.


The
Lake
level
that
fluctuated
due
to
variations
in
rainfall
on
the
lake
and
immediate
catchment,
closing
the
period
under
review
at
476.44m
(6.52%
usable
storage)
as
of
18th January
2026,
compared
to
475.98m
(3.37%
usable
storage)
recorded
on
the
same
date
last
year.


From:


5
January
2026


To:


18
January
2026

 
Day This
Year
%Full Last
Year
%Full
5-Jan 476.22 5.01% 475.85 2.48%
6-Jan 476.21 4.94% 475.87 2.61%
7-Jan 476.21 4.94% 475.88 2.68%
8-Jan 476.2 4.87% 475.9 2.82%
9-Jan 476.18 4.74% 475.9 2.82%
10-Jan 476.18 4.74% 475.91 2.89%
11-Jan 476.18 4.74% 475.92 2.96%
12-Jan 476.19 4.80% 475.93 3.02%
13-Jan 476.27 5.35% 475.94 3.09%
14-Jan 476.33 5.76% 475.94 3.09%
15-Jan 476.36 5.97% 475.95 3.16%
16-Jan 476.38 6.11% 475.97 3.30%
17-Jan 476.4 6.24% 475.98 3.37%
18-Jan 476.41 6.31% 475.98 3.37%
lake

Post
published
in:

Featured