Margot Cleveland Profile picture
Mar 20 7 tweets 2 min read Read on X
🔥🔥🔥Judge Boasberg's order today in Alien Enemies Act case CONFIRMED Government position that it did NOT violate Minute Order. Judge ordered Trump to explain why he did not violate order by "failing to return" but Minute Order DID NOT order Government to RETURN. 1/ Image
Image
2/ Minute Order ORDERED Trump Administration "not to remove" tDa members. But Judge, in HIS own words, stated that the tDa members had been "removed" and wants to know why they weren't "returned."
3/ Judge can try to spin it all he wants, i.e. "well, that's not what I meant," but just looking at plain language of two Minute Orders that judge himself issued, there was no violation of the Minute Order.
4/ As to the Order judge gave from bench about turning planes around, here the precedent supports government that later order controls.
5/5 Yes, Trump's team is playing by narrowest reading of actual orders & running stream engine through any exceptions, but he is doing that to AVOID a constitutional crisis & butting Article II against Article III, as this THREAD from yesterday detailed.
6/ Also, I should note government made point in earlier hearing that dTa terrorists had been "removed" as "removed" is defined by statute, and thus no violation of Minute Order.
7/7 But now you have Judge himself in his own words saying they had been "removed" & issue was they weren't returned--something not orders.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Margot Cleveland

Margot Cleveland Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ProfMJCleveland

Mar 22
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING 🐂💩! National Ass. of Diversity Officers JUST filed most outrageous motion in district court seeking to "Vacate Preliminary Injunction." To simplify: Court GRANTED National Ass. of Diversity Officers injunction & now they are asking same court to tear it up!!! 1/
2/ Why? Well, Nat. Ass. of Diversity Officers (Plaintiffs) WON injunction but Trump Administration appealed and Fourth Circuit "stayed" injunction pending resolution of appeal. Such a stay is "rare" and only entered when party who was enjoined by injunction likely to win.
3/ That means while appeal is pending Trump's DEI EOs remain active and it means Plaintiffs are likely to LOSE! And they know it and are desperate to keep an appellate court from establishing precedent.(Here's Fourth Circuit's order granting stay.) storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Read 11 tweets
Mar 22
🧵This is a MUST READ THREAD by @shipwreckedcrew to understand the legal issues of yesterday's hearing re the Alien Enemies Act. My thread below picks up on some of these points. A few prefactory notes: a) Judge also pushed DOJ on issues related to compliance v. contempt. 1/
2/ A second related focus was jurisdiction over the case. Here DOJ said challenge can ONLY be brought in habeas. I agree based on this case. And because it can only be brought in habeas, it should be transferred. casetext.com/case/lobue-v-c…
3/ Sorry my diner customers just arrived...back shortly.
Read 14 tweets
Mar 21
Boasberg hearing now: Starts drilling attorney why he wasn't in court last & .
DOJ: You certified class action. More subject to proclamation.
Judge: And did not order anyone release or couldn't deport anyone via regular proceedings.
Judge "I think it's important to public to make those facts clear."
NOTE: We're not idiots!
DOJ: Maintains it has complied with Court order.
2/ AUGH. Got bumped out and couldn't get back in.
DOJ: distinguishing between what is reviewable and what is not but argues only habeas case.
Judge: Al Queda require proof they were member those held in Gitmo.
DOJ: Not robust but habeas is available.
Judge: Let's talk about habeas is sole avenue of review, since Plaintiff's dismissed. It seems that while it has taken place in habeas context they were challenging detention...what case were they not.
3/ DOJ: references case where internationally used habeas to remove to another country. Their challenge is that government can't exercise authority under AEA to keep then in custody.
Judge: If folks type entitled to some sort of hearing, what is standard of review for executive whether they are members of tDA?
DOJ: No clear case law but generalized principles, review is deferential.
Read 13 tweets
Mar 21
Judge Reyes is clearly not open-minded about this.
2/ Judge: "Who in the military made this determination?"
DOJ: "Mr. Dill made that determination"
Judge: Who did Mr. Dill confer with? You say this is military judgment who was involved in deliberation. You can't come in here and say we don't even know Secretary of Defense looked at it.
DOJ: Long standing precedent of good faith.
Judge: How do you not have in this information? Just give me one more name? You don't have information on military readiness by losing people with gender dysphoria?
3/ Judge: I don't have any evidence that this causes problems. She is basically saying all of these analyses I made are same, right?
Judge: "Gender dysphoria" is a subset of transgendered.
No other subset is suspect class? "This is first time the military is arguing a condition makes people dishonest or lacking in integrity?"
Ummm, people with many other mental conditions lack integrity.
Read 8 tweets
Mar 21
🚨Trump Administration seeks to dissolve injunction in military gender-dysphoria case or stay pending appeal, arguing it isn't a blanket bar on transgender troops, but turns on medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria. 1/ Image
2/ This was wise move because "Gender Dysphoria" is a Mental Disorder, and saying military can't bar folks for "mental disorder" by a court is CRAZY. Someone who is "transgender" but with no "mental disorder" wouldn't be barred, though per clarification. This turns issue
3/ Because transgender lobby try to pretend it isn't a "mental disorder" but a matter of being born in the wrong body or that their "gender" just is different than their sex, and that's not a disorder. BUT
Read 5 tweets
Mar 21
😡😡😡THREAD: Starting fresh thread elaborating on horrifyingly abusive order just entered by a federal judge. Judge Chuang just clarified that he was enjoining Jeremy Lewin, individual Marco Rubio delegated authority to serve as Deputy Administrator and COO of USAID could not: Image
2/ Let that sink in: A Federal Judge told the Acting USAID Administrator and Senate Confirmed Secretary of State the man Rubio selected to serve as Chief Operating Office & Deputy Administrator couldn't serve in those position b/c Judge says injunction applies to Lewin. Image
3/ And no one can possible act as the COO/Deputy Administrator if they have to have EVERY action they take expressly authorized by another USAID employee. Nor could Lewin execute those jobs if he can't terminate contracts, grants, employees, etc. Image
Read 16 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(