Thanks to @Philippicae for tagging me on just filed appeal by Trump Administration in 10th Circuit challenging Colorado district court ruling in Alien Enemy Act case. 1/
3/ First, the two named plaintiffs are NOT being detained under Proclamation and have not been found to be members of tDa. As such, they cannot challenge the Proclamation or their detention under habeas on that basis. Court should have dismissed lawsuit.
4/ And if named Plaintiffs lack valid claim, they cannot represent a "putative class" of tDa members subject to withdrawal. "Putative" just means proposed or wanna-be class.
5/ Entire lawsuit should have been tossed & definitely not "class wide" relief. And as Trump Administration notes the order should qualify as an injunction subject to appeal because it extends beyond 14 days.
6/ On merits, Trump Administration highlights how in other cases, due process is met with very fast acting removals. I was not familiar with this line of authority but it is very persuasive that notice provided her is all that is due.
7/ Trump Administration highlights expedited removals in another context that provide decisions should be made in 24 hours but no more than 7 days.
8/8 Frankly, I was concerned that the process provided wouldn't be that sufficiently "due," but this analysis has persuaded me.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🚨🚨🚨District court entered injunction barring Trump Administration from taking steps to implement president's determination that unions no longer represent certain employees based on federal statute Trump invoked: 1/
🚨Yet another effort to interfere in Trump Administration's management of agencies filed today regarding DHS's terminations of employees. Lawsuit filed by three organizations seeks, among other things: 1/
🚨🚨🚨BREAKING: Court unseals procedure for Alien Enemies Act removals, explaining notice & process. 2 key points: First, notice is given in native language, so did ACLU mislead court by focusing on written notice being only in English? 1/
2/ Notice provided, as Declaration states, is more than provided in expedited removal cases. THIS point was made in appeal filed in 10th Cir. earlier. Given Courts have held less process is due in other situations, where not dealing w/ terrorists, hard to say not enough here.
3/ Returning to first point: How much of ACLU's claim that notice was given only in English drove SCOTUS to interfere when there was NO decision by lower court? And did ACLU know notice provided in native language? I'd wager they did & misled court.
🚨🚨🚨Another federal judge entered another injunction trumping the Trump Administration's executive authority. The D.C. Circuit has already stayed similar injunctions holding claims must go to the Court of Claims. Here we have that plus employment disputes. 1/
2/ Not only does the Court seek to control operation of Voice of America, it is requiring the Trump Administration to report in on a monthly basis on its operations. Trump Administration's brief highlights the many reasons Plaintiffs' claims fail. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
3/ To illustrate how out of bounds this order is, the court ordered the reinstatement of those with personal service contracts even though those contracts provide they can be terminated with 15 days notice.