Re federal judge "ordering" reinstatement of probationary workers...this was the original order entered as a TRO: 1/
2/ Here's what Court said in minute order from today's hearing which indicates language from TRO was merely extended. NOTE: That TRO does not state probationary employees must be reinstated and appears to be another "toothless TRO" b/c if agencies independently fire, is allowed.
3/ I need to see what Court eventually says in order, but my "gut" is Plaintiffs will end up needing to seek to enforce because agencies want those probationary workers fired w/ or w/o OMB's directive. At that point, Court will be forced to order (or not order) reinstatement.
One additional point of note from filing: Khalil was charged with being removable under a very specific code provision 1227(a)(4)(C)(i). THAT is not section most folks have been discussion related to support of terrorism etc.
2/ Of interest is the exception incorporated that actually allows for removal of alien expressly based on alien's "beliefs, statements, or associations," in other words what we would consider pure First Amendment activities, so long as Rubio makes "personal" determination.
3/ Researching case law on this to see if it's been challenged on First Amendment grounds yet, but interesting b/c lots of non-speech, i.e. bad conduct at issue, statute allows for removal based on pure speech.
3/ I noted earlier Kahlil was already in NJ before government new of habeas petition but now it appears he was there before the petition was even filed!
🚨🚨🚨Mahmoud Khalil habeas petition is now up but courtlistner is down, so here's screengrabs. 1/
2/
3/ Some thoughts: IF these allegations were all true and there were no other relevant facts, then yes, he would be entitled to habeas relief. BUT from publicly available information we know MK wasn't merely speaking.
2/ This is also similar to AIDS Vaccine (Ali) and Rhode Island case (McConnell) involving similar issues:
This will be my next lawsplainer bucket because it is next wave of what will make SCOTUS.storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
3/ Overlapping issues in these cases include:
a) Can Plaintiffs challenge cancelations under the Administrative Procedure Act?
b) Do cancelations violate law, namely Impoundment Control Act?
c) Does Court have jurisdiction over must it go to Court of Claims?