More from @ProfMJCleveland

Margot Cleveland

@ProfMJCleveland

Apr 19

🚨District court judge in the case that ACLU double-leap-frogged to SCOTUS entered an order detailing the timing of everything. This order makes even more striking SCOTUS decision to toss "norms" to the wayside. 1/

2/ storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

3/ Ironically, Plaintiffs aren't getting any action by district court now b/c by seeking 5th Cir.'s involvement district court canceled deadlines, but then 5th Cir. denied as premature. Of course, ACLU doesn't care b/c it got SCOTUS to issue stay even though class not certified.

Read 4 tweets

Margot Cleveland

@ProfMJCleveland

Apr 19

🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Late last night SCOTUS directed Trump not to remove any aliens under Alien Enemies Act based on a "putative class" meaning there is NO certified class action yet. So much for norms! 1/

2/ What makes SCOTUS' decision even more "norm" breaking is that it acted before allowing 5th Cir. to act and 5th Cir. actually dismissed appeal & request as "premature" because it is "a court of review" and district court needs a chance to rule.

3/ Also key is what 5th Cir. said....this is about "named petitioners"--a class was never certified so why in the world is a court entering an order related to a non-existent plaintiff?

Read 11 tweets

Margot Cleveland

@ProfMJCleveland

Apr 18

https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1913320467047346623

🚨Judge Boasberg set an emergency hearing for 6:15 p.m., so starting momentarily. I'll have your color commentary. 1/

https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1913320467047346623

2/ Judge: I have another concerns with my ability to act on plaintiffs' TRO I think I need to first to find out what is happening in court and on the ground. What's happening legally?
ACLU: Sought emergency relief in both 5th Circuit & SCOTUS given urgent circumstance.
Judge: Are you seeking same relief there as here?
ACLU: Yes. No removal for 30 days...or without more notice. We believe on way to airport. Appears more being transport. All being moved out of north district of Texas. (Got nationawide TRO in southern TRO). Northern District Court b/c 2 named plaintiff not being removed. Notice in English said you were being removed and could make a phone call. Our position is that whatever SCOTUS meant that what they did can't possibly this little notice.

3/ DOJ: Sought TRO in n.d. in Texas, and 5th & SCOTUS: TRO in other districts, such as CO/NY. Certainly quite of number of these cases.
Judge: Now what's going on on the ground. Do you agree what notice they were given? 24 hours notice in English?
DOJ: Told in language they could understand and not in English. No flights tonight. No plans for flights tomorrow. "People I talked to..."
Judge: What is government's position on whether a detainee merely needs to check a box to say he has to file versus or has to get to court?
DOJ: They can say they want to challenge within a certain time (similar to expedited removal) & then have time to file habeas (minimum 24 hours) and then won't be removed while habeas pending. Not removed then. Many habeas have been filed.

Read 11 tweets

Margot Cleveland

@ProfMJCleveland

Apr 18

🚨🚨🚨BREAKING. I. Can't. Even. 1/

2/ District court entered injunction prohibiting firings in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau & appellate court entered partial stay of injunction, to allow Trump to fire people except as necessary to carry out statutory duties.

3/ Trump had legal team assess what staffing was needed to carry out mandated statutory duties and RIFed everyone else. AND submitted a sworn statement saying say.storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

Read 6 tweets

Margot Cleveland

@ProfMJCleveland

Apr 18

🧵on Garcia (MS-13 El Salvadorian gang member): DOJ has staked out it's position--all it will do to facilitate Garcia's return to US is to, if Garcia presents at a port of entry, to take him into custody in U.S. 1/

2/ District court has said "facilitate" means what it means in dictionary and you must "facilitate" Garcia's return to U.S. under that meaning & submit to discovery to tell us what you have done. DOJ's position is "no, you must tell us precisely what you want us to do first."

3/ DOJ sought a stay making this point & that forcing Executive to "facilitate" beyond removing domestic barriers for Garcia to enter U.S. infringes on Article II. 4th Circuit denied stay.

Read 17 tweets