*HUGE* Win for President Trump in the challenge to Chicago's law enforcement surge. This is a stunning rebuke of the district court, explaining that the order is necessary to stop futute courts from following. The district judge is chastened by the appeals judges for overstepping
Equally important is another court has joined in to explain the problems with district court judges entering so-called "putative" class actions. The Seventh Circuit recognizes the problems and orders courts to stop, under the Trump v. CASA decision.
"Recall that the plaintiffs asked the district court for an order voluntarily dismissing the case with prejudice pursuant to Rules 23(e) and 41(a). That ruling would bind the whole class, which is why the district court held a hearing and had
the parties notify the class...
...as Rule 23 requires. No class members or lead plaintiffs objected to dismissing this case with prejudice. Nor did anyone request an opt-out." Huge recognition of this problem in putative class actions.
Judge Easterbrook dissents. He would merely dismiss the appeal. But even he acknowledges serious concern with the district court's behavior here.
Huge win for @TheJusticeDept and Federal Programs specifically that had to manage what the Seventh Circuit has recognized as an unreasonable court that failed to follow the federal rules.
Ho boy. The court in the IRS/anti-weaponization case has issued a 56-page order indicating its extreme dissatisfaction. Relying on the 35-Former Federal Judge amicus, it revokes its settlement. And it refers Acting AG Blanche & Associate AG Woodward for discipline. I'm skeptical!
The Court begins with its view of why there was adversity in the case United States v. Windsor. That is notable because it was an obvious test-case: President Obama admitted DOMA was unconstitutional and refused to dismiss it in Court. Distinguishing here seems tough.
The district court cites the recent Trump v. Slaughter case for its explanation that the President runs the executive branch. Thus, the Court explains, there cannot be adversity between the President (and others) in his personal capacity and the IRS.
👀That was fast. @SenatorBanks read Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence in the Birthright Citizenship case closely. The Supreme Court's Wong Kim Ark said 3 categories of people don't get citizenship. One is children of invaders. So he's introducing a law labeling illegals invaders
@SenatorBanks And this builds on President Trump's declaration that the border crisis is an invasion. Intrigued to see where this goes. Read the article by @ccreitzpolitics here: foxnews.com/politics/trump…
@SenatorBanks @ccreitzpolitics Journalist Josh Hammer weighs in on this one too:
Pro-life case for @DAGToddBlanche by @josh_hammer. Josh takes a hard look at one of the few serious conservative critiques of Mr. Blanche's record on pro-life issues and explains why his course of action is the prudent one. And a choice not to take the easy way out. Worth a read
@DAGToddBlanche @josh_hammer "The easy answer for Blanche, if all he cares about is political advancement, is to simply sign the consent decree and then blame the system when it is promptly undone by the courts and used as leverage to gum up the FDA review process...
@DAGToddBlanche @josh_hammer ...but Blanche is choosing the harder route of working toward a durable solution that even the Fifth Circuit can't stop." @josh_hammer explaining the political calculus. Also notable in the article is the shout out to @AGLizMurrill (and her litigation team led by Ben Aguinaga)!
Why does Governor Josh Shapiro hate nuns? In a case stemming from his time as Attorney General, Pennsylvania has tried to prosecute the Little Sisters of the Poor (a nunnery) for asserting a religious objection to the contraception mandate. Governor's counsel argued the case
This is weird! Usually a State's Attorney General represents the State in appellate courts. Presumably here, the difference is due to the Attorney General realizing this quixotic vendetta that the Supreme Court has rejected multiple times is a loser.
The good guys here split time -- both @TheJusticeDept and it's crack Civil Team led by @AAGShumate and head of civil appellate Eric McArthur, and leading religious liberty litigator @becketfund @markrienzi.
Big win for @FTC today in front of Chief Judge Boasberg in the deceptive claims case against WPATH. "When parties seek an extraordinary remedy, they must make an extraordinary showing." Big win for @AFergusonFTC, @MeadorFTC, and the whole team. Litigation may proceed
Judge Boasberg agrees with @FTC in that his earlier order was to quash a CID. This separate enforcement proceeding is not that CID. Therefore, his injunction is not being violated.
Boasberg explains that there are risks with the path WPATH puts forth. "[L]inking a suit by the FTC to pre-enforcement investigation challenges risks allowing plaintiffs 'to choose the forum and pace of litigation simply by bringingn pre[-]enforcement actions.'"
Can deportable illegal aliens use the Constitution's Due Process Clause to end run around federal immigration law? A Fifth Circuit panel said yes, over a dissent by Judge Wilson. Now, the full Fifth Circuit has agreed to hear the case. The panel opinion is vacated.
The original panel opinion split on the Due Process clause. 71 total pages between the majority and dissent. Very interesting dispute.