- cross-posted to:
- theguardian_us@ibbit.at
- cross-posted to:
- theguardian_us@ibbit.at
Federal judge said prosecutors picked to replace Alina Habba repeated error of bypassing congressional approval
Three prosecutors installed by Donald Trump’s administration to lead the New Jersey attorney general’s office after the president’s former personal lawyer was disqualified from the role in December were also illegally appointed, a federal judge has ruled.
Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, handpicked the three to replace Alina Habba, who resigned after a succession of district and appeals court rulings that she was serving illegally because she never received Senate confirmation.
On Monday, federal judge Matthew Brann said Bondi’s actions repeated the same error of bypassing congressional approval for the appointments. He stopped short of ordering their removal pending a government appeal – but, in a blistering 130-page ruling, said overreach by the executive branch could jeopardise all of its cases before him.
You must log in or # to comment.
For the Attorney General, an incredible amount of what Bondi is doing is absolutely illegal.
As a lawyer, she is of course aware of this, but she does it anyway because she has no other choice anymore.
In a constitutional state, she would undoubtedly be sentenced to life imprisonment for all her crimes, because what she is doing is in fact high treason.
However, like the rest of this administration, she seems to assume that the rule of law no longer exists, which is indeed the case under this regime.
So I think: The blantant criminals who are in charge in the US not only will, but must establish an autocracy, following failed states like Russia, for example, because otherwise they will go to prison. This would be the logical consequence of a new, democratically elected government, even in a legal system as corrupt as that of the US – the people would quite rightly demand at least some consequences, and leaders like Bondi are not nearly influential enough to undermine the rule of law in the way that the current president is doing.
However, this is merely my assessment as a European - perhaps I am underestimating the degree to which the obviously absurdly corrupt political system in the US is undermining fundamental democratic functions. So maybe people like Bondi could somehow still get away with their crimes under new administration.
We’re not completely screwed until they replace enough judges. The ones in place are able to slow if not fully prevent many of these abuses, primarily ones where the government has to operate through the judicial branch.
I think the Supreme Court was just a means to an end. The establishment of an autocracy, however, will essentially be achieved through ICE, an agency that was introduced under Bush Jr. and now serves as a secret police force with exclusive loyalty to the head of the fascist conspiracy. To me this seems obvious by now, given that this agency operates beyond the law and even executes people in the open street. Another very obvious indication is its astronomical budget, which is equivalent to the military spending of a medium-sized country, or, in US terms, more than the cumulative budget of all other federal US-agencies such as the FBI, CIA, etc.
Please note: This is nothing more than my opinion as a reasonably interested observer from afar.
Oh god, yes. Still, between Habeas petitions, lawsuits against administration hirings and firings, and many others. The litigants are flooding the judiciary and the Supreme Court logistically can’t overrule everything.
What makes you think that a Supreme Court that has ruled that the US president is effectively above the law would make any decision that is compatible with a democratic constitution - this decision is certainly not compatible with any democratic constitution in any country that I am aware of.
The rest of what I describe has little to do with the legal system, because ICE already exists in the form described.
Again, I should point out that I am from Europe and this is merely my opinion, but against the backdrop of recent events, I cannot see how anyone can still have any faith left in the US legal system. To me, it seems more like an accomplice that enables organized crime on this absurd scale in the first place, rather than a system that serves the good of the people.
As someone inside of this mess, my point is that there are too many legal proceedings in too broad of a range of issues for SCOTUS to be given the opportunity to overturn all of them, barring SCOTUS giving POTUS the explicit power to fully ignore the Constitution and nullifying all state and regional courts and their decisions. Is this impossible? No. However if that doesn’t happen, a rickety frame of rulings and laws supporting the Constitution are likely to still exist in the U.S. when he passes from the mortal coil. The judiciary (SCOTUS and some circuit courts notwithstanding) and the citizens are the only entities who have consistently and successfully stood up to the administration, even if most of those wins have been small.
We are completely agreed on ICE/DHS.
I think the Supreme Court was just a means to an end.
Together with the executive and the legislature, that court served as a third means of what it’s called a system of checks-and-balances which by principle are supposed to limit the powers of either three, and that power is never invested in the person but in the office.
However, besides they’re holding the position for life, Supreme Court justices are chosen by the president and thus became heavily dependent on party alignment and some personal biases than impartiality.
Ha! Ha ha ha. We were screwed a ways back, a long ways.
Fair. Looking purely at 30k, we were already screwed, and this administration is mostly successful at speed running it. The judiciary is where we have a fighting chance, barring many people getting off their screens (self: guilty) and staying in the streets until we make structural change.*
*Defined by many different people in many different ways.
If there’s anything the American center-right party will do, it’s say that it’s “better for the nation to move on from this” while applying only the most minimal of consequences, which, of course, only ensures that it will happen again.
Some, including myself, already are of the opinion that the US is an autocracy because its billionaire class has effectively taken over the reigns. Whatever checks there are don’t actually balance out the billionaires with the rest of greater America.
There is no doubt that the US has been an oligarchy for several decades. However, an autocracy is a different thing, because in such a system, the oligarchs enforce their power through brute force.
An example that is not very far from the US in this regard is Russia: this country is ruled by a tiny elite, as has long been the case in the US, but this elite no longer even pretends that the people they oppress have any choice. Anyone who opposes the system simply disappears, and I think it is precisely this total power that US billionaires are now claiming for themselves. In other words, I think the US oligarchs have now realized that no one is stopping them - and they will use this to abolish even the illusion of democracy.
Isn’t that basically ICE and the selective enforcement of the law as demonstrated in Epstein?
Are you sure you haven’t been exposed to so much violence that you’ve been convinced to redefine it?
I’m not entirely sure what you’re getting at, but I can assure you of one thing: the status quo in the US is currently miles away from what an autocracy is. If you lived in one, you would have to fear for your life just because of these social media comments. And I mean that seriously: Palantir is just as much a thing in the US as the Patriot Act - if this country finally falls to fascism, every opposition, every dissident will be mercilessly wiped out. How that will play out is already evident today in the closest ally of the US, also a fascist regime: namely, Israel.
Are you not afraid of your comments getting you put in a concentration camp? I am.
Judges need to put on their big boys pants and start holding this administration in contempt. They don’t learn unless it hurts their bottom line.
They’re already moving in that direction, and today I heard Pam Bondi is trying to rewrite the rules so that if any state bar – those bodies tasked with discipline of attorneys in every state, a task entirely reserved to the states by both law and regulation for many years – investigates a federal attorney, the DoJ gets first exclusive hit at the investigation. LegalEagle did a great explainer on it today:
Bondi Demands DoJ Exempt From Ethics Oversight – LegalEagle
It’s insane. But this recent move toward contempt is why: she’s trying to get out in front of the state bars so that she can continue to direct federal attorneys to do illegal, unconstitutional, and blatantly corrupt things.
Yeah all of this stuff and noone has been held in contempt still. It is still just strongly worded letters.
no one has been held in contempt still
That’s just false. One already has been and more are in process.
It is still just strongly worded letters.
That too is demonstrably false. It’s what the sworn declarations are all about:
And so to ensure future compliance, Judge Farber said that going forward, he’s going to require two sworn declarations in every immigration habeas case. One from the head of the civil division in the US Attorney’s office, attesting that she conveyed the court’s order to the appropriate personnel at ICE and advised them that compliance is mandatory, and one from the New York ICE field office director, or by the New York ICE field office deputy director, attesting that he received the order and will ensure that it’s carried out. That’s not just for the court’s informational purposes. That’s Judge Farber saying, “I do not trust you and you’re going to have to give me the name of the person to hold in contempt if ICE ignores my orders.” – from the above linked video, approx 11:30 and forward
That is demonstrable fact. Sworn declarations are not just strongly worded letters, any more than orders or judgements are. To expect judges to employ something other than the tools of their trade – the “worded letters” you scorn – is insane.
Contempt rulings against ICE attorneys have already happened. Clearly more are coming. But if you can’t accept the fact of what tangibly IS, I do not expect you to accept the fact of what may possibly, intangibly be in the future, so there’s that.
Sometimes people just like to shit on anything factually, tangibly good that is happening in the right direction because it is not ALL and PERFECT and EVERYTHING they want it to be. For myself, I appreciate that there are still people actually fighting and doing what they personally can do within their own sphere of influence, like these judges. They deserve to have the truth told about the good they are doing.
Yeah that is one where she said “please hold me in contempt, so I can sleep” and the DOJ fired her. No jail time. We will see if that other judge follows through. From my perspective it is like two dogs barking at each other until the gate opens and they both don’t do anything. Until there is jail time nothing changes. Unless that is not what being held in contempt is.
I wonder how many US judges lean conservative
Christofascist Talibandi Barbie doing his nibs bidding regardless those pesky laws.
Mass Impeachment Time Now!
Serious question, because I really don’t know. But has there ever been a precedent in any country/city/school board/whatever…, where once someone has been removed from office, their term was completely expunged, as in every decision they made, every appointment, etc… was reversed and the clock reset back to before they took office?
In classical antiquity there were a couple people that they tried to erase from history altogether. They were successful with a few of them AFAYK.
They tried for a few. Who knows how many they succeeded with erasing.
Caligula is an example. The written history came from his haters.
Lol that’s not how it works.
You can’t undo reality.
You cannot un-kill a person.
You cannot un-fight a war.
You cannot un-nuke the world.
Wait wait wait. It’s a 130 page ruling and is blistering? I have a hard time imagining something that’s both.
Also, I understand these cases are all very serious and judges want to cover all the bases. Still it’s hard to imagine how/who is tasked with writing a whole 130-page court ruling. Do you divide it amongst your clerks?
Is it just me or do some of these people who he picked for things look like they do porn?
No, it’s not your imagination. My apologies to the ladies, but Trump’s favorite attorneys generally have legal talent and personal ethics that are inversely proportional to the attractiveness of their legs and/or rack size.
LOCK HER UP!
No waaay, she looked super competent and even overqualified! Luckily we still have the rest of Trump’s administration team to fall back on.
