Retired lawyer here: Are these DOJ attorneys, filing these incendiary motions/letters/whatever with Judge Boasberg, (1) clueless and incompetent or (2) spoiling for a fight that they can spin to the MAGA faithful as Trump being Mr. Tough Guy, or (3) they think this is a good case for SCOTUS to weigh in on because it deals with "terrorism" as defined by the Trump Admin? Iʻm so tired, Joyce, Iʻm sure itʻs worse for you and your colleagues.
From what I can tell, the government attorneys are trying to balance on the edge of a very thin and razor-sharp blade. Whenever an attorney is in that kind of position, they're in serious danger. Fraud on the court is not a situation any attorney wants to find themselves in. If the district court finds that a government attorney has fibbed, that attorney can expect to get a most unpleasant inquiry from their bar. A federal government attorney owes their duty to the United States, not the Attorney General, not the President, not the Commissioner of whatever agency they may be working for. It does not matter if the President, the AG, the Commissioner, or a division head gives an illegal order. That attorney cannot legally or ethically follow it. That's a hard situation to be in; I've been there, and there is always intra-agency heck to pay. But I'd rather pay it than try to explain to my bar (or under oath to a Congressional investigative committee) why I did some darned fool thing that landed me in a pig sty.
I have never seen or heard of such incautious insolence from a government lawyer. I do however expect to see more examples of this in the coming months.
Yes, but as Joyce Vance has pointed out there is nothing secret about any of this. In fact, the deportations have been deliberately held up by the administration as an example of their determination to aggressively pursue their immigration policies. The whole argument about an invasion of the USA by a criminal Venezuelan gang with close ties to the Maduro government is a story concocted to allow Trump to use the Alien Enemies Act.
These alleged gang members are not a government. They are not representatives of a government. They are free agents and thugs. Sort of like the Space Nazi and his roving band of destructive teenagers.
From Meidas .. … Immigration lawyer Lindsay Toczylowski: “My client fled Venezuela last year and came to US to seek asylum. He has a strong claim. He was detained at entry because ICE alleged his tattoos are gang related. They are absolutely not. Our client worked in the arts in Venezuela. He is LGBTQ. His tattoos are benign. But ICE submitted photos of his tattoos as evidence he is Tren de Aragua. His attorney planned to present evidence he is not. But never got the chance because our client has been disappeared.”
… “The Alien Enemies Act would allow the Trump admin to remove people from the US based on an accusation alone. The accusation could be, as it is for our client, completely baseless. But they would remove them anyway, despite the dangers, despite the lack of due process. What happened today is a dark moment in our history. One bright spot in this madness that I see are the many lawyers and advocates across the country who spent their Sat fighting like hell to preserve justice in the face of horrific cruelty. And we will keep fighting.”
Being scared shitless is the only first rational response to this second act of the TrumpMusk takeover of the country. The second would be figuring out the best way to fight back.
@Netto. They plead the Secrets Act. If the judges dores not have the proper clearance, that could end the case. Some of us (like me) have experience. If the judge doesn't have the clearance, has to get it.
Yes, but as the judge pointed out he has experience on the FISA court and the administration had made no serious attempt to justify their actions. They claim that the planes had already departed and were over international waters at the time of the original order yet they won't give precise details of the timelines. They've even tried to get him removed from the case. He's shown remarkable patience in my view.
The government knew I had the same issue previously, but they have the right to make affirmative defenses. I would ask them to do the equivalent of a privlege log..... .If there was top secret material, I would seal it. Sometimes on appeal the cir court would unseal the record.....
The worst was when the Chinese military stole our identities through our security clearances in 2014. My security clearance did not cover everthing ... it was mysterious. I knew some of the judges who heard security status appeals...they tried to become APA judges but were denied.
I have some war stories. One of my colleagues didn't like the picture on her ID and when she complained lost her clearnace for a couple of months.....
I am not a lawyer, just a humble number cruncher. But this situation doesn’t pass the smell test. Glad to read the perspectives of Ms Vance and other experienced attorneys.
Thank you, kind sir. I feel like the Salieri character in Amadeus. Able to recognize genius and painfully aware of how far short of that ideal he falls.
I am wondering if some states can secede? What is the process for that? Will it be violent or nonviolent? Do the states have enough guts to separate themselves from the path of disaster?
The question of secession was decided in 1865, in the negative. There is no right of secession. My four ancestors who had their lives upended in assuring that outcome would like to introduce you their bayonets.
Some scholars are asking whether ratification of the Constitution may be withdrawn. See Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 and 1799, drafted by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson respectively, state responses to the Federalist-backed Alien and Sedition Acts, asserting that states could nullify federal laws deemed unconstitutional.
Some folks in Washington and Oregon say they want to return to Canada. They were jointly occupied by the United States and Great Britain (later Canada) until the 1846 Oregon Treaty established the border along the 49th parallel, with the northern portion becoming British Columbia and later part of Canada.. Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party of Canada, offered to accept Washington, Oregon, and California as new Canadian provinces.
Don't forget Hawaii. California's economy is reportedly 5th in the world - when you add the economies and natural resources of Washington State, Oregon and Hawaii who wouldn't want to annex them? Trump would want them more than Greenland. Perhaps the United States of the Pacific is a better plan. Putin would love it.
Lawyer professional discipline is administered by the courts of the individual jurisdictions that admitted the lawyer to practice
So it goes state by state
Not sure how it works in federal US jurisdiction; in Oz the right to work in federal matters depends on remaining in good standing in one’s state. Losing state ticket automatically disqualifies from federal court here.
In this context, two things are important to keep in mind. First, most of the government lawyers are practicing in the DC courts and are DC Bar members. Pam Bondi's brother is running for president-elect of the DC Bar. It is important for all DC Bar members to vote for the other candidate in the upcoming election to insure that Bondi's brother will not make it difficult or impossible to effect discipline on DC Bar members for their unethical actions taken at AG Bondi's direction.
One would imagine that the DC bar is a sufficiently engaged electorate to thwart this, unlike so many elections in the US’ atomised democracy where only zealots cast votes, leaving the rest to wonder what went wrong after the event.
Hope you’re right, but a large percentage of the DC Bar members don’t live in or near DC, so it’s possible that there will be a lot of votes cast by members who actually live in red states.
The debt of gratitude and the respect I have for the lawyers and Judges who are diligently fighting against this administration is immense. I truly hope this assault on our Constitution does not prevail in sinking our Democratic Republic. I support them where I can and protest against the injustice.
This is authoritarianism. The idea is to usurp and eliminate all authority other than Trump's. It has little to do with the "MAGA faithful" per se, but it's very much part of the Trumpian actions to destroy the government.
We are in this together indeed, and I am beyond grateful for you. The most brilliant of minds, such as you, can make things understandable to the rest of us. Your conclusion is sobering but needs to be said. Hard for me to express my gratitude that I can be “in it together” with people of such character and integrity as you. As difficult as it is, I walk in integrity of my core values and am grateful not to be on the other side.
Mc Kinney needs to read Featbhers of Hope. IMHO We lost the cold war. Our govenment supports totaliarian dictator Putin, the leader of a second rate power. 22 Republican senators, dozens of Republican House members voted to fund Ukraine.
Many of them call Trump a liar about Putin.
Get those Republicans who oppose Putin on the record!
Once again, impeachment will not remove him but in this case the public needs to know if a nominee steals an election through unfair means. Further, our constitution needs to be changed so the VP cannot automatically become president (unless it is due to death). Our country should be allowed to 1) have a new election, or 2) the court decides in such a case what steps need to be taken.
Sometimes I wonder whether Stephen Miller would be able to pass the "I am not a robot" test. I've never seen another pair of such dead eyes - unless, maybe, those in the face of Charles Manson.
Under normal circumstances, Federal Marshalls are employed to haul them away, however, appears BonDEI has some say-so about using them. The judge may direct local police and/or probation officers to do the deed. Seems to me we should be deputizing a few people, like yesterday!
It wouldn't be the first time that law enforcement drew their weapons on each other in this country. Hard to believe that we're at that point.....but we are.
When the Peace agency called the local police to protect against "marshals" that broke in with dogebros, the police didn't help. (Rachel Maddow last night.)
The very short version is that a judge can hold someone in civil contempt, to which the presidential pardon power does not apply, and that judges have the authority to appoint or order someone to enforce the contempt order if US Marshals abandon longstanding practice and the honor of their station and refuse to do so.
We now have congressional Republicans going on FOX "News" and other Maga media demanding these judges be impeached. Judges' faces are all over social media. Musk has shown the Judge's daughter's face and her information. This is Nazi level bullshit and it is being enabled by every Republican out there. They don't respect the law. They own the DOJ and they respond with contempt and mockery. Homan said today "they're not stopping". He could care less about the law. So what now?
Your final paragraph raises the possibility (probability?) that the Supreme Court could green-light the Administration's actions in this case. That sends chills down my spine and breaks my heart. As a retired attorney, I find this particularly galling. I fear for our country.
You can be sure there is some sort of kickback involved. And, for a nominal fee, you too can have one of YOUR pesky neighbors or troublesome relatives sent on a little vacation to exotic El Salvador. Step right up!
That's the core principle of "The Art of the Deal": kickbacks; what's in it for me?; bullying; extortion — all the fine character traits of an immeasurably small man.
Why are the deportees being sent to a for-profit prison in El Salvador? Perhaps because the constitution does not extend to El Salvador—thus the 6th Amendment trial guarantees, 8th Amendment protection from cruel and unusual punishment, and 14th Amendment right to due process, among others, do not apply. Think about it: “our” government is sending prisoners, who may be guilty of only undocumented entry, to a likely long and violent prison sentence on third party soil without any legal protection. If they’re being deported , send them home. I am disgusted by this aspect of the government’s lawless and authoritarian conduct, in addition to all the others.
It is bleak indeed. Rounding people up and sending them to a prison camp out of the country where no one can reach them or intervene for them. This is not the America my parents generation fought for-- they freed people from death camps. I do not have much faith in the courts being able to turn this around, since SCOTUS gave him immunity. God help us.
Can State Bar Associations start bringing actions against these lawyers who are making arguments that are clearly unconstitutional and they are repeatedly acting in violation of the Court’s orders? These lawyers aren’t even pretending that what they are doing isn’t in violation of the oath they took to uphold the constitution. Perhaps a threat to their license might knock some sense back into them.
Have to find out which states hold their licenses and follow their procedurres. Many lawyers in DC are licensed elsewhere. I was in Pa and Fl. My office was in DC. .
You know the thing I don't understand is Trump/Elon/ Etc. more than likely cheated to win the election but nobody is investigating it so meanwhile Trump runs roughshod over our country with his diabolical nonsense and becomes more and more emboldened. Why isn't somebody anybody trying to stop these horrendous blows against our country or are we just supposed to watch the collapse knowing full well he doesn't even belong in that office!
If Democrats had the guts, they would have investigated. They always play Nice guys, and as the saying goes, they lose. They don’t learn from their experience. No wonder their popularity rating is tanking.
I fear we're already there. I don't expect Trump to obey this or any judge... except the corrupt SCOTUS judges who said "You cannot be charged with a crime when you're POTUS".
Even government employees violating a lawful court order should be put in jail. They're public servants, not above the law. The only potential defense is that the order was not lawful ((the government must prove that it was lawful). See 18 U.S. Code § 401: federal courts "have power to punish by fine or imprisonment, or both" any "such contempt of its authority" as (but "none other" than) "Disobedience or resistance to its lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command."
Other irrelevant offenses in Section 401 are:
(1) Misbehavior of any person in its presence or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice; and
(2) Misbehavior of any of its officers [judges and attorneys actually employed by the court] in their official transactions.
If Trump is guilty of contempt of court, Judge Boasberg should order Trump to jail. Trump won't go, so there will be no actual harm to any lawful exercise of executive power in such an order. But then this issue can be raised up to SCOTUS so they can reconsider their absurdly unconstitutional "judgment" that We the People somehow made the president immune from criminal prosecution for criminal abuses and usurpations of power.
As Article VI emphasized, our "Constitution" and federal "Laws" are "the supreme Law of the Land; and [all] Judges in every State" are "bound thereby." As Article III emphasized, ALL federal "judicial Power" including the power "vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish" can "extend" no further than permitted "under this Constitution," federal "Laws" and "Treaties."
As Article II emphasized, the people "vested in a President" ONLY such power as is necessary and proper to "preserve, protect and defend" our "Constitution" to "the best of" the president's "Ability," including by "tak[ing] Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."
Article II further emphasized that "The President" and "Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall b removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, any "high Crimes" or high "Misdemeanors." Article I emphasized that We the People "vested in" Congress "All legislative Powers" to "make all Laws" that are "necessary and proper for carrying into Execution" absolutely "all" the "Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
As Article I emphasized, the point of impeachment by the House and conviction by the Senate is that the president can be subjected to "removal from Office" and then "be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law" for any high Crimes or high Misdemeanors (by a jury of his and our peers).
Nothing about any of the foregoing (the plain text or the plain meaning or the plain purpose) of our Constitution indicated that We the People delegated power to the president to commit conduct that Congress (and a prior president) made criminal to protect us from abuses and usurpations of power by every public servant.
Nothing about any of the foregoing (the plain text or the plain meaning or the plain purpose) of our Constitution indicated that We the People delegated power to six SCOTUS justices to declare that the president somehow had immunity from prosecution for crimes committed that fell within the scope of impeachable conduct.
These attorneys are clearly the loyalists that Trump wanted in his first term of office. Incompetent. Trump no longer has guard rails, and he clearly wants to pit his executive authority against the judicial authority — and the Constitution be damned! If this isn’t a constitutional crisis, I don’t know what is.
"The government’s response was that because the president is the commander-in-chief and he can direct military forces, he has Article II powers under the Constitution that are not subject to judicial review."
The mention of "military forces" is ominous.
He wants to claim exaggerated powers based on Article II, but does not want to abide by the responsibilities included in Article II, including the oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" and "take care that the laws be faithfully executed".
Retired lawyer here: Are these DOJ attorneys, filing these incendiary motions/letters/whatever with Judge Boasberg, (1) clueless and incompetent or (2) spoiling for a fight that they can spin to the MAGA faithful as Trump being Mr. Tough Guy, or (3) they think this is a good case for SCOTUS to weigh in on because it deals with "terrorism" as defined by the Trump Admin? Iʻm so tired, Joyce, Iʻm sure itʻs worse for you and your colleagues.
I'm another retired lawyer. The government's conduct in this matter stands my hair on end. And I, too, am very tired.
Can you turn them in to their respective bar associations?
From what I can tell, the government attorneys are trying to balance on the edge of a very thin and razor-sharp blade. Whenever an attorney is in that kind of position, they're in serious danger. Fraud on the court is not a situation any attorney wants to find themselves in. If the district court finds that a government attorney has fibbed, that attorney can expect to get a most unpleasant inquiry from their bar. A federal government attorney owes their duty to the United States, not the Attorney General, not the President, not the Commissioner of whatever agency they may be working for. It does not matter if the President, the AG, the Commissioner, or a division head gives an illegal order. That attorney cannot legally or ethically follow it. That's a hard situation to be in; I've been there, and there is always intra-agency heck to pay. But I'd rather pay it than try to explain to my bar (or under oath to a Congressional investigative committee) why I did some darned fool thing that landed me in a pig sty.
I have never seen or heard of such incautious insolence from a government lawyer. I do however expect to see more examples of this in the coming months.
If there is top secret material, if the judge has a top security clearance, the secret material can be "sealed" so that it is not public record.
Yes, but as Joyce Vance has pointed out there is nothing secret about any of this. In fact, the deportations have been deliberately held up by the administration as an example of their determination to aggressively pursue their immigration policies. The whole argument about an invasion of the USA by a criminal Venezuelan gang with close ties to the Maduro government is a story concocted to allow Trump to use the Alien Enemies Act.
These alleged gang members are not a government. They are not representatives of a government. They are free agents and thugs. Sort of like the Space Nazi and his roving band of destructive teenagers.
First have to prove they are gang members.
From Meidas .. … Immigration lawyer Lindsay Toczylowski: “My client fled Venezuela last year and came to US to seek asylum. He has a strong claim. He was detained at entry because ICE alleged his tattoos are gang related. They are absolutely not. Our client worked in the arts in Venezuela. He is LGBTQ. His tattoos are benign. But ICE submitted photos of his tattoos as evidence he is Tren de Aragua. His attorney planned to present evidence he is not. But never got the chance because our client has been disappeared.”
… “The Alien Enemies Act would allow the Trump admin to remove people from the US based on an accusation alone. The accusation could be, as it is for our client, completely baseless. But they would remove them anyway, despite the dangers, despite the lack of due process. What happened today is a dark moment in our history. One bright spot in this madness that I see are the many lawyers and advocates across the country who spent their Sat fighting like hell to preserve justice in the face of horrific cruelty. And we will keep fighting.”
Let's clarify something here, the "gang" is in the WH conducting this operation for the US Mafia Don and Muskrat.
Everyone in this country should be scared shitless, I know I am.
Being scared shitless is the only first rational response to this second act of the TrumpMusk takeover of the country. The second would be figuring out the best way to fight back.
Pretty sure this mafia gang is Russian
@Netto. They plead the Secrets Act. If the judges dores not have the proper clearance, that could end the case. Some of us (like me) have experience. If the judge doesn't have the clearance, has to get it.
Yes, but as the judge pointed out he has experience on the FISA court and the administration had made no serious attempt to justify their actions. They claim that the planes had already departed and were over international waters at the time of the original order yet they won't give precise details of the timelines. They've even tried to get him removed from the case. He's shown remarkable patience in my view.
The government knew I had the same issue previously, but they have the right to make affirmative defenses. I would ask them to do the equivalent of a privlege log..... .If there was top secret material, I would seal it. Sometimes on appeal the cir court would unseal the record.....
Under this "administration", good luck with getting a security clearance if you are sane…
The worst was when the Chinese military stole our identities through our security clearances in 2014. My security clearance did not cover everthing ... it was mysterious. I knew some of the judges who heard security status appeals...they tried to become APA judges but were denied.
I have some war stories. One of my colleagues didn't like the picture on her ID and when she complained lost her clearnace for a couple of months.....
Per Counselor Google, Article 3 judges don't need security clearances to review top secret documents in cases they are adjudicating.
Ain't necessarily so....
I am not a lawyer, just a humble number cruncher. But this situation doesn’t pass the smell test. Glad to read the perspectives of Ms Vance and other experienced attorneys.
Incautious my a**. He is testing the limits, as heartless predators always do before pouncing on a victim.
All of the above.
succinct, as usual, Cuz!
You are too kind, cuz. I have a tendency toward verbosity that borders on the pompous. I try to restrain myself but usually fail.
Actually, Good Sir, you are often usefully erudite-for which. thanks--
and, when another says something clear and cogent, you acknowledge
and express appreciation - all good!
Thank you, kind sir. I feel like the Salieri character in Amadeus. Able to recognize genius and painfully aware of how far short of that ideal he falls.
I am wondering if some states can secede? What is the process for that? Will it be violent or nonviolent? Do the states have enough guts to separate themselves from the path of disaster?
The question of secession was decided in 1865, in the negative. There is no right of secession. My four ancestors who had their lives upended in assuring that outcome would like to introduce you their bayonets.
Some scholars are asking whether ratification of the Constitution may be withdrawn. See Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 and 1799, drafted by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson respectively, state responses to the Federalist-backed Alien and Sedition Acts, asserting that states could nullify federal laws deemed unconstitutional.
Some folks in Washington and Oregon say they want to return to Canada. They were jointly occupied by the United States and Great Britain (later Canada) until the 1846 Oregon Treaty established the border along the 49th parallel, with the northern portion becoming British Columbia and later part of Canada.. Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party of Canada, offered to accept Washington, Oregon, and California as new Canadian provinces.
Don't forget Hawaii. California's economy is reportedly 5th in the world - when you add the economies and natural resources of Washington State, Oregon and Hawaii who wouldn't want to annex them? Trump would want them more than Greenland. Perhaps the United States of the Pacific is a better plan. Putin would love it.
This is great information. I was unaware of this Canada connection. I should seriously try to move to California where I have relatives.
Not totally accurate. I recall Texas came up with a workaround a few years ago. Ill see if I can find it again.
I remember thinking it was clever enough to pass initial muster.
Another question: have all these lawyers and officials forgotten their oaths of office? Have they flushed the idea of loyalty to our constitution?
The short answer: YES!!
They take their oaths of office as seriously as the short-fingered vulgarian took his marriage vows - all three times.
I'm still wondering where the American Bar Association is. Who is responsible for lawyers' behaviors.
Lawyer professional discipline is administered by the courts of the individual jurisdictions that admitted the lawyer to practice
So it goes state by state
Not sure how it works in federal US jurisdiction; in Oz the right to work in federal matters depends on remaining in good standing in one’s state. Losing state ticket automatically disqualifies from federal court here.
In this context, two things are important to keep in mind. First, most of the government lawyers are practicing in the DC courts and are DC Bar members. Pam Bondi's brother is running for president-elect of the DC Bar. It is important for all DC Bar members to vote for the other candidate in the upcoming election to insure that Bondi's brother will not make it difficult or impossible to effect discipline on DC Bar members for their unethical actions taken at AG Bondi's direction.
One would imagine that the DC bar is a sufficiently engaged electorate to thwart this, unlike so many elections in the US’ atomised democracy where only zealots cast votes, leaving the rest to wonder what went wrong after the event.
Hope you’re right, but a large percentage of the DC Bar members don’t live in or near DC, so it’s possible that there will be a lot of votes cast by members who actually live in red states.
We are ALL tired, lawyers or not. The implications are not hard to understand for readers paying attention.
when does the knowingly making frivolous legal arguments to the judge cross the line of a violation of professional conduct rules?
Already done...
Retired Oz lawyer here. Grateful for the quality of both bench and bar in this country.
What you are going through is very disturbing.
The debt of gratitude and the respect I have for the lawyers and Judges who are diligently fighting against this administration is immense. I truly hope this assault on our Constitution does not prevail in sinking our Democratic Republic. I support them where I can and protest against the injustice.
I vote that it is option 2 as you have provided.
I think so too
This is authoritarianism. The idea is to usurp and eliminate all authority other than Trump's. It has little to do with the "MAGA faithful" per se, but it's very much part of the Trumpian actions to destroy the government.
OR #4 - doing what they are told they MUST do by their "bosses"?
yes.
We are in this together indeed, and I am beyond grateful for you. The most brilliant of minds, such as you, can make things understandable to the rest of us. Your conclusion is sobering but needs to be said. Hard for me to express my gratitude that I can be “in it together” with people of such character and integrity as you. As difficult as it is, I walk in integrity of my core values and am grateful not to be on the other side.
Well said!!
“Conclusive Audits Could Serve Trump’s Impeachment”
Read Kevin McKinney’s excellent article below and SHARE!
https://open.substack.com/pub/kmac/p/if-the-2024-election-was-hacked-whats
Mc Kinney needs to read Featbhers of Hope. IMHO We lost the cold war. Our govenment supports totaliarian dictator Putin, the leader of a second rate power. 22 Republican senators, dozens of Republican House members voted to fund Ukraine.
Many of them call Trump a liar about Putin.
Get those Republicans who oppose Putin on the record!
Impeach. Feathers of Hope. https://jerryweiss.substack.com/p/remove-impeach-impeach
Once again, impeachment will not remove him but in this case the public needs to know if a nominee steals an election through unfair means. Further, our constitution needs to be changed so the VP cannot automatically become president (unless it is due to death). Our country should be allowed to 1) have a new election, or 2) the court decides in such a case what steps need to be taken.
Read Feathers of Hope.
This is great, but how do I copy and forward the link? I signed up as a free subscriber.
Go to the bottom. There are about 4 items to choose from:
• “like” which is a heart
• “message” which is next to it
• “Restack” which is round with arrows
• “share” which is a flat bottom “U” with an arrow pointing up
This gives you the opportunity to send to a text, email, copy link etc..
Hope that helps!
Toward bottom of screen is an arrow and open box icon. Click there and follow directions. Keep moving screen around; icon may disappear
Amen to that! So grateful for you Joyce Vance!!
The judge needs to throw their ass’s in jail. And while we are at it, stephen miller and steven cheung as well since 💩 should not be in public.
Stephen Miller last night was out of control. As usual.
Sometimes I wonder whether Stephen Miller would be able to pass the "I am not a robot" test. I've never seen another pair of such dead eyes - unless, maybe, those in the face of Charles Manson.
Absolutely!
Yes, but how will he do that?
Under normal circumstances, Federal Marshalls are employed to haul them away, however, appears BonDEI has some say-so about using them. The judge may direct local police and/or probation officers to do the deed. Seems to me we should be deputizing a few people, like yesterday!
I’d bet this is a common topic in chambers among federal judges right now.
I imagine it definitely is. I just am hankering to see one implement it.
It wouldn't be the first time that law enforcement drew their weapons on each other in this country. Hard to believe that we're at that point.....but we are.
When the Peace agency called the local police to protect against "marshals" that broke in with dogebros, the police didn't help. (Rachel Maddow last night.)
I saw that also, last night. If I remember correctly, it was the D.C. police who wouldn't help the agency.
I don't think the AG can interfere with a court order. Period.
Miles between “can” and “should.”
It isn't like these people Care about law.
In the past, yes, it simply wasn’t done. Times have changed.
This article in Democracy Docket explains in detail what resources and powers the courts have available to them: https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/if-the-marshals-go-rogue-courts-have-other-ways-to-enforce-their-orders/
The very short version is that a judge can hold someone in civil contempt, to which the presidential pardon power does not apply, and that judges have the authority to appoint or order someone to enforce the contempt order if US Marshals abandon longstanding practice and the honor of their station and refuse to do so.
That surely seems the last refuge of a democracy with its back against the wall. Lets hope it holds. No one else has.
Contempt of court and sanctions….
A hearty reference to the Bar Association too.
And bove
And a whole lot of them, including Musk.
We now have congressional Republicans going on FOX "News" and other Maga media demanding these judges be impeached. Judges' faces are all over social media. Musk has shown the Judge's daughter's face and her information. This is Nazi level bullshit and it is being enabled by every Republican out there. They don't respect the law. They own the DOJ and they respond with contempt and mockery. Homan said today "they're not stopping". He could care less about the law. So what now?
"He could care less about the law."
I would add: "he could care less but it would be difficult".
Or the straightforward, "he couldn't care less about the law".
Homan would have been right at home in Nazi Germany. He even looks the part.
Homan is merely a jack-booted thug who will, in the end, be turned away by Satan because he doesn’t want the competition.
Concealed carry
Your final paragraph raises the possibility (probability?) that the Supreme Court could green-light the Administration's actions in this case. That sends chills down my spine and breaks my heart. As a retired attorney, I find this particularly galling. I fear for our country.
“Conclusive Audits Could Serve Trump’s Impeachment”
Read Kevin McKinney’s excellent article below and SHARE!
https://open.substack.com/pub/kmac/p/if-the-2024-election-was-hacked-what
Link is bad - Page Not Found.
Not sure why it says "Page Not Found" but if you click on the article it will brink it up.
Great, thanks! I was able to read it now. 😃
In addition don-old paid $6M to El Salvador for housing of the gang members. I’m wondering if he’ll take a “personal” cut of that housing fee. 🤔
You can be sure there is some sort of kickback involved. And, for a nominal fee, you too can have one of YOUR pesky neighbors or troublesome relatives sent on a little vacation to exotic El Salvador. Step right up!
Yep. And where did he get the money from. I didn’t read anything about Congress voting on. Must be muskrat.
That's the core principle of "The Art of the Deal": kickbacks; what's in it for me?; bullying; extortion — all the fine character traits of an immeasurably small man.
Out of his own pocket? or was that taxpayer money?
Surely not out of his own pocket!
Never out of their own pockets now that they own the treasury.
I’ve always wondered when they think they’ll have enough. Right now I just say: more money than brains.
Agreed. No way it’s out of Trump’s pocket.
thought of a good game for everyone's next party/dinner: the only thing out of trump's pocket is................
tRump "branding rights" of the prison?
Lovely. May he be a resident of the Trump Prison. Soon.
Oh this a now a new business venture for the felon?
The whole POTUS show is a business venture now.
Why are the deportees being sent to a for-profit prison in El Salvador? Perhaps because the constitution does not extend to El Salvador—thus the 6th Amendment trial guarantees, 8th Amendment protection from cruel and unusual punishment, and 14th Amendment right to due process, among others, do not apply. Think about it: “our” government is sending prisoners, who may be guilty of only undocumented entry, to a likely long and violent prison sentence on third party soil without any legal protection. If they’re being deported , send them home. I am disgusted by this aspect of the government’s lawless and authoritarian conduct, in addition to all the others.
Well, if I was a betting person, I throw my chips in. 😂
don-old and his cult are just evil.
Where is Musk when you need hom?
It is bleak indeed. Rounding people up and sending them to a prison camp out of the country where no one can reach them or intervene for them. This is not the America my parents generation fought for-- they freed people from death camps. I do not have much faith in the courts being able to turn this around, since SCOTUS gave him immunity. God help us.
Can State Bar Associations start bringing actions against these lawyers who are making arguments that are clearly unconstitutional and they are repeatedly acting in violation of the Court’s orders? These lawyers aren’t even pretending that what they are doing isn’t in violation of the oath they took to uphold the constitution. Perhaps a threat to their license might knock some sense back into them.
How about instead of a threat, they actually lose their license. They can then fill the void left behind by the migrants who contributed to society.
Good one! Thank you.
@Ann. Ans. Yes. Someone has to file a bar complaint.
The DC bar?
Have to find out which states hold their licenses and follow their procedurres. Many lawyers in DC are licensed elsewhere. I was in Pa and Fl. My office was in DC. .
You know the thing I don't understand is Trump/Elon/ Etc. more than likely cheated to win the election but nobody is investigating it so meanwhile Trump runs roughshod over our country with his diabolical nonsense and becomes more and more emboldened. Why isn't somebody anybody trying to stop these horrendous blows against our country or are we just supposed to watch the collapse knowing full well he doesn't even belong in that office!
Yup, I'm still wondering why the significant anomalies that were reported about the votes don't seem to have been investigated.
If Democrats had the guts, they would have investigated. They always play Nice guys, and as the saying goes, they lose. They don’t learn from their experience. No wonder their popularity rating is tanking.
You answered your own question. We know full well...!
But we have no power. So we stand frozen and watch Death approaching like the loathsome beast lurching toward Bethlehem to be born.
Se Marlo's post above.
OMG 😱 This is so depressing and so frightening
Seems like it’s all coming to a head, to a decision point. If the Govt wins this we are all in a different country
I fear we're already there. I don't expect Trump to obey this or any judge... except the corrupt SCOTUS judges who said "You cannot be charged with a crime when you're POTUS".
Even government employees violating a lawful court order should be put in jail. They're public servants, not above the law. The only potential defense is that the order was not lawful ((the government must prove that it was lawful). See 18 U.S. Code § 401: federal courts "have power to punish by fine or imprisonment, or both" any "such contempt of its authority" as (but "none other" than) "Disobedience or resistance to its lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command."
Other irrelevant offenses in Section 401 are:
(1) Misbehavior of any person in its presence or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice; and
(2) Misbehavior of any of its officers [judges and attorneys actually employed by the court] in their official transactions.
If Trump is guilty of contempt of court, Judge Boasberg should order Trump to jail. Trump won't go, so there will be no actual harm to any lawful exercise of executive power in such an order. But then this issue can be raised up to SCOTUS so they can reconsider their absurdly unconstitutional "judgment" that We the People somehow made the president immune from criminal prosecution for criminal abuses and usurpations of power.
As Article VI emphasized, our "Constitution" and federal "Laws" are "the supreme Law of the Land; and [all] Judges in every State" are "bound thereby." As Article III emphasized, ALL federal "judicial Power" including the power "vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish" can "extend" no further than permitted "under this Constitution," federal "Laws" and "Treaties."
As Article II emphasized, the people "vested in a President" ONLY such power as is necessary and proper to "preserve, protect and defend" our "Constitution" to "the best of" the president's "Ability," including by "tak[ing] Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."
Article II further emphasized that "The President" and "Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall b removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, any "high Crimes" or high "Misdemeanors." Article I emphasized that We the People "vested in" Congress "All legislative Powers" to "make all Laws" that are "necessary and proper for carrying into Execution" absolutely "all" the "Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
As Article I emphasized, the point of impeachment by the House and conviction by the Senate is that the president can be subjected to "removal from Office" and then "be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law" for any high Crimes or high Misdemeanors (by a jury of his and our peers).
Anybody who wants to see what Congress determined was a high misdemeanor can see Section 1 of the Sedition Act of 1798 (which was enacted at the same time as the law that Trump has invoked). See https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/alien-and-sedition-acts
Nothing about any of the foregoing (the plain text or the plain meaning or the plain purpose) of our Constitution indicated that We the People delegated power to the president to commit conduct that Congress (and a prior president) made criminal to protect us from abuses and usurpations of power by every public servant.
Nothing about any of the foregoing (the plain text or the plain meaning or the plain purpose) of our Constitution indicated that We the People delegated power to six SCOTUS justices to declare that the president somehow had immunity from prosecution for crimes committed that fell within the scope of impeachable conduct.
Suppose you’re right. Now what?
Civil coercive contempt -- jail is probably the last recourse. I like fines that double for each successive occurrence.
These attorneys are clearly the loyalists that Trump wanted in his first term of office. Incompetent. Trump no longer has guard rails, and he clearly wants to pit his executive authority against the judicial authority — and the Constitution be damned! If this isn’t a constitutional crisis, I don’t know what is.
"The government’s response was that because the president is the commander-in-chief and he can direct military forces, he has Article II powers under the Constitution that are not subject to judicial review."
The mention of "military forces" is ominous.
He wants to claim exaggerated powers based on Article II, but does not want to abide by the responsibilities included in Article II, including the oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" and "take care that the laws be faithfully executed".
He always disregards the responsibility part.
As you mention judicial review... maybe SCOTUS would overturn Marbury v. Madison. (Interesting reading!) 🤔
I should clarify that I was quoting Joyce in that first sentence.
A blatant perversion of the Constitution & Rule of Law!
Bleak indeed!