🚨🚨🚨Trump Administration files its Emergency Motion for Stay of Judge Xinis's order re Garcia. Court orders Garcia's attorneys to respond by 5. 1/
2/ Fishing expedition with discovery noted.
3/ While it was a mistake to remove Garcia to El Salvador, Trump Administration makes point that it could have the withholding of removal to El Salvador formally removed. That doesn't change that it was mistake but makes this exercise seem even more ridiculous.
4/ Here is what Court order for discovery:
5/ This is where this appeal begins and ends:
6/ As for the litany of cases the district court cited regarding what the Executive branch could do to facilitate and aliens return as I noted yesterday there's a difference between what they can do and what a court can order them to do. Trump Administration makes that point:
7/ I'm still not happy w/ DOJ's handling of "facilitate release from custody." SCOTUS said that order would be appropriate. SO DOJ needs to explain that since Garcia is not being held for U.S. or being paid by U.S. there is nothing to facilitate that would not mandate diplomacy.
8/ Here's what DOJ asks for in stay:
9/ DOJ also argues Judge Xinis violated "mandate rule" meaning she ignored what SCOTUS told her to do by ordering DOJ to file details before she amended her order.
10/ On discovery, Trump Administration argues inappropriate because "facilitate" isn't defined.
11/ Trump Administration notes that mandamus is often granted in such circumstances:
12/ Trump also counters narrative that detention at prison is torture.
13/13 And this one's for the idiot who about a week ago quipped I was merely repeating word "mandamus" I just learned about 5 minutes ago. NOTE: Yesterday I stressed it would be appeal of order re facilitate AND mandamus re discovery.
THREDETTE: I'll have more thoughts on 4th Cir. opinion denying Stay and Mandamus later, but in short, there was a lot...I mean A LOT, I agreed with in Judge Wilkerson's measured opinion. But he was fundamentally WRONG in his conclusion & his attitude of superiority. 1/
2/ Bottom line is Article III cannot force Article II to engage in diplomatic efforts EVEN if it is in private. And no only does district court mandate Trump does so, she wants full discovery about it.
3/ And Wilkinson's frame of this as a constitutional crisis of Trump's making ignores the outrageous overreach of the district court. BUT Trump Administration IMNSHO screwed up by not facing reality that SCOTUS ordered "facilitation" with "release from custody."
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Fourth Circuit denies Trump stay and denies mandamus in Garcia case. Court's opinion seeks to take a high ground but blames Trump for the constitutional crisis where lower court has far exceeded her authority. That said: As I stressed, fundamental problem is 1/
2/ that the record suggests Trump has spirited away Garcia to a foreign prison and that Garcia is held there because Trump wants him held there and is paying for it. As I've been screaming: IF Garcia is held in El Salvador prison because he is El Salvadorian gang member & not
3/ because we entered into an agreement for El Salvador to hold Garcia and pay for his detention, this case is entirely different. Then it is beyond Trump's authority to facilitate other then by Article III infringing on Article II.
🚨🚨🚨Un.Frickin.Real. Attorneys in the Alien Enemies Act ask Boasberg to now enter a TRO that orders government to provide 30 days notice for removal of any class member under AEA & serve on both class member & ACLU.
2/ Attorneys claim that the Court continues to have jurisdiction...This is nutso!! SCOTUS said only habeas action and habeas requires physically in district and none of named plaintiffs are physically in this district.
3/ OMfrickingosh: ACLU is arguing it can bring a claim over propriety of notice in the D.C. District because SCOTUS explained what due process required even though the case wasn't habeas.
🧵Below is my THREAD of Boasberg's opinion of probable cause of contempt. Some global thoughts: There are two equally significant issues with Boasberg's opinion. First, a frivolous order can be ignored, he admits. 1/
2/ When it is a private party, they may not be entitled to decide "frivolous" but when we are talking an equal branch of government, the standard must differ. And here there are three huge problems, where Boasberg's order was frivolous.
3/ First, order injunctive relief for class action in this context is unheard of & frivolous. Second, there was no jurisdiction here for habeas & it was clear. And third, there was no subject matter jurisdiction under APA b/c Congress limited jurisdiction to when no other remedy.
On road & parked momentarily for a couple things so no time to do tweet thread on JudgeBoasberg’s order. But if he opens his opinion with an outright misrepresentation of what his order was, that tells me rest of substance sucks.
2/ This is factually wrong too: The boast was that they succeeded in avoiding an order preventing the removal...not that they ignored the removal order.
🚨🚨🚨Judge Xinis issues two orders in Garcia (El Salvadorian case). Many thoughts: First, Judge provides footnote with many things government did to "facilitate" return to U.S. BUT that Article II decides to do those things is different than Article III mandating it. 1/
2/ Court continues to assume Garcia is held in El Salvador because we requested it and we are paying for it. DOJ needs to clarify that is NOT the case or if it is case, they'd be wise to immediately tell El Salvador are prior request is rescinded & no longer paying for it.
3/ Here is newspaper article Judge Xinis cited but this suggest that deal was only for tDa members. Also, since AP said it had a memo re deal, I'd think they'd release it if it concerned El Salvadorians. apnews.com/article/trump-…