THREAD II: And now on to the second brief filed by @carterwpage attorney, with @McAdooGordon serving as local counsel. This brief responds to GOVERNMENT's motion to dismiss. The other brief was the 8 individual actors: This is DOJ/FBI as entities. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
2/ Interesting. Didn't realize this was part of relief sought:
3/ Yup, that's just what our government did:
4/ Synoposis of full argument:
5/ With zinger to close introduction:
6/ A great point: This wasn't about Page--this was about Trump!
7/ Still trying to zero in on who the actual leaker was. Doesn't matter if they were all in on it but the emails b/w Strzok and Page (see THREAD I) are suggestive.
8/ Back shortly: Math & lunch time for DS.
9/ Reading on to see if they are identified...
10/ These are Page's claims against government as an entity. The FTCA is basically a federal statute that allows you to sue it under basic "tort" principles that apply to business/individuals.
11/ Patriot Act claims are based on gov't unlawful use of information gathered. Here, Page claims gov't unlawfully used info in "media leaks" strategy and also in later FISA applications.
12/ Also, on point that warrant was issued to they are all protected, this argument is solid:
13/ This paragraph is a perfect capsulization of why SOL has not expired.
🚨New filing in Boasberg Alien Enemies Act case. Amazing this must be said! 1/
2/ That excerpt was from a Declaration filed by Trump Administration in support of its Response in Opposition to New Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. This Response is interesting as it is first effort by Trump Administration to explain whether it is in constructive control
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Federal district court enters first merits ruling on Alien Enemies Act habeas case. On question of class certification: Court punts on whether class cert. under Rule 23 is available & considers if All Writs Act provides analog, i.e. another way to do a class. 1/
2/ Court holds "yes," so treating it as a class action which allows ACLU to represent all terrorists Trump seeks to remove under Alien Enemies act whether they ask to challenge removal or not!
3/ Note: This remains limited to the jurisdiction of the d.ct. though, so ACLU still seems to need to file "class actions" in all 94 districts...well it would need to if SCOTUS hadn't entered a stay in a non-case with non-plaintiffs already!
🚨Folks, I'm seeing A LOT of what I believe is misreporting regarding an order entered yesterday by Judge Thurston. Her ACTUAL order appears to be consistent with federal law: 1/
2/ So she is NOT saying they can't arrest without a warrant and it should be easy to prove "flight risk" on an individual basis...in fact that's precisely what ICE requires, which prompted Trump Administration to argue case was moot.
3/ So bottom line the ACTUAL order is merely what law requires & policy states, although the "comply with law" injunctions are disfavored. And entering an injunction requiring following of a policy NOT constitutionally required is problematic. That policy concerns documentation
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: On Sunday, @NCLAlegal on behalf of its clients, @FDRLST and @realDailyWire sent letter to Attorney General Bondi in response to President Trump's EO on censorship and Secretary Rubio's recent announcement of closing new censorship HUB is State Department. 1/
2/ The letter applauded the President's change in policy and efforts undertaken to protect First Amendment rights but noted ongoing concerns.
3/ As we explained, Secretary Rubio's recent announcement of shuttering of the new censorship hub actually validates our concerns that bureaucrats continued stealth efforts to target domestic speech in excess of their foreign remit.
🚨Judge just entered clarifying order in case of 2 year old American. Judge's clarification provides helpful context: In short, Judge sees factual dispute concerning whether mom wanted to take 2 year old or not & that is the Court's concern. 1/
2/ (Sorry got pulled away): Judge's comments & order make much more sense now AND if a legitimate habeas case, Judge seeking to make factual determination would be appropriate, although mom's letter has not been called into question by any of evidence.
3/ Problem though is this is not legitimate habeas case because Plaintiff lacks authority to act on behalf of child because there is no evidence dad has any authority to act on behalf of the child. Under Louisiana law, mom has all parental rights if dad & mom weren't married.