[OldDeckHand]

"As for the other judges (Texas and Georgia; not Ohio), they've let it go for some reason."

I spent 20+ years as a military lawyer, so I'm probably not the right guy to ask. I have had some, but limited experience in Federal court - plus, most states have an special admissions exceptions for military lawyers who meet other administrative requirements (ie admitted to the federal bar as well as admitted the bar in another state).

I think the exigency of a TRO is a probable reason in this case, but I'm at a loss for the other actions. Do you know for sure she wasn't granted Pro Hac Vice in those other cases?

[Sibre Fan]

Do you know for sure she wasn't granted Pro Hac Vice in those other cases?

I'm sure that
(a) There was no order granting pro hac vice admission in Cook v. Good, filed in MD. Fla. (per the Docket from PACER); and
(b) The WD Texas Court denied her motion for pro hac vice admission as moot in Rhodes v. Gates (again, per the docket from PACER).

Judge Land did not issue a written order granting pro hac vice admission in either Cook v. Good or Rhodes v. MacDonald, according to the dockets in both cases. However, given that he permitted her to argue in open court in both cases, he must have granted some status during the hearings in both cases, at least for purposes of the hearing(s).