Month: May 2019
Material filed by #ACLU in #SDNY and #SCOTUS in US #Census case. Redacted for “deliberative process privilege.” Is ACLU just teasing or did it catch a big one? @maddow @lawrence
First, I think ACLU violated the Court rule.
After a case has been argued or submitted, the Clerk
will not file any brief, except that of a party filed by leave of
Supreme Court Rule 25 (7).
Here is the complete Respondent’s Notice of Filing. My SCOTUS experience is limited so I can’t speak to whether the Court might just ignore it. Perhaps just decide it warrants a footnote in the opinion that is likely well along in the drafts. So ACLU must know the rule. They’re acting like it’s a big deal.
So, SCOTUS is seeing the unredacted material over which the Trump administration is claiming executive privilege. ACLU may have caught a big one but it’s under seal in the SCOTUS. But ACLU teed it up in NY in a contempt sanction motion so the district judge in #SDNY is in a position to have it flop out on the deck in public. And all SCOTUS will be left with is the stink.
Here’s a link to the SCOTUS Docket.
In #DeutscheBank @realdonaldTrump SDNY litigation, the parties filed joint motions in both 2nd Cir and SDNY. Links and explanation. @maddow @lawrence
In the SDNY they parties filed Joint Motion to stay. This motion seek to stay the procedgins not the subpoena. It’s a smart thing to do especially for attorneys who aren’t getting paid by their client or who are on a shoestring budget.
In the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit the parties filed a Joint Motion to establish an expedited briefing schedule that lays how the case will proceed and also says that materials unrelated to the parties will be produced. NB Russia is not a party. No way to tell who they are addressing.
Link to Steven Calk unsealed indictment that was assigned to Judge Lorna G. Schonfield, Obama appointee and first Filipina US District Judge. She has one of the Trump civil cases.
Link to OCR’d copy of #Assange Superseding Indictment. I think Manning finally relented and testified to the Grand Jury. @maddow @Lawrence
In Mazars DC Subpoena appeal, Trump files motion to set expedited briefing but it’s really just a stalling tactic. Here’s the motion and some analysis.
20190522 Joint motion for briefing
The House has agreed to the briefing. It may signal the Circuit that it may resolve. Normally you would address the stay issue first. IMO a request to have the case in chief heard on expedited basis and, if that is denied in the next 7 days (when the agreed stay expires) gives Trump’s position more validity than it deserves. But if the House thinks this works then fine.
I won’t be surprised if the DC circuit simply denies all of this without briefing and tell them to file the stay motion with #SCOTUS. There really isn’t much a record and the case and these outrages must be addressed immediately.
From page two of the motion.
If the Court denies this joint motion to expedite, within seven days Plaintiff-
Appellants will file an emergency motion to stay the district court’s judgment pending appeal. The Committee, through counsel for the House of Representatives, agrees to suspend the time for production set by the subpoena until that motion is decided and, if it is denied, until seven days thereafter. Mazars agrees not to produce any documents in response to the subpoena during that period.
The court could address this motion as the request for a stay and deny it and send to CJ John Roberts.