Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, fuggled said:

 

Really rather unusual for the Court to base a ruling on the factual realities of a case, and this Court in particular.

But they're seeming to get that when the government is threatening to remove people without due process and then claim they can't get them back, that's the kind of irreparable harm that renders the other injunction factors kinda irrelevant.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 hours ago, immamac said:

I was assured that the court was gonna do whatever king trump said. 

And when Trump ignores their rulings, then what army is gonna enforce them?

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)

Regarding yesterday's hearing in the Abrego Garcia case, the government submitted a declaration from lil Marco supporting the invocation of state secrets privilege.  Judge Xinis found it wanting and will unseal it.

Also she was mad that no declarations came from DHS/ICE Barbie.

She appears ready to invoke the power to review the material the government is withholding (without showing it to the opposition) to see if the privilege is properly invoked, an "in camera" review.  That should be fun.

Also, in the expedited discovery period, the plaintiffs were permitted to depose the three people that gave declarations in the status of Abrego Garcia.  As could be expected, those people knew nothing and were escape goats.

Accordingly, the plaintiffs requested, and were granted, permission to take the depositions of DHS, DOS, and DOJ on an "institutional" basis, where the witness has to dig around for information to answer questions and can't respond "I don't know that's not my area."  Also indicated that the court may grant a request for such a deposition of the "White House." Probably pretty unusual.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1


×
×
  • Create New...