General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJustice Department lawyers may soon pay a high price for lying to the courts
ACLU filed a "remarkable" brief in federal court on Friday: drumpf's Justice Department entangled itself in an entirely different web of deceit. Additionally, the brief references a forthcoming motion for sanctions against the government attorneys who litigated this case. In addition to the lie about the citizenship question -- in which the Trump administration implausibly claimed that it added the question to aid Voting Rights Act enforcement -- they also lied about the deadline for printing census forms.
According to a Think Progress story published on Sunday, July 7,
Because of this claim by Trumps Justice Department, courts processed this case on an unusually expedited basis. Among other things, the Supreme Court invoked a rarely used procedure that bypassed review by a federal appeals court and allowed the nations highest court to review a trial courts decision directly.
Not long after the Trump administration lost in the Supreme Court, however, it started singing a different tune. Though Justice Department lawyers initially signaled that they were giving up the fight to defend the citizenship question, they were later contradicted by President Trump himself. On July 3, they told a federal judge that theyve been instructed to examine whether there is a path forward, consistent with the Supreme Courts decision, that would allow us to include the citizenship question on the census.
In their brief, the ACLU invokes a doctrine known as judicial estoppel: essentially the Justice Department should be held to its previous claims about a June deadline. 'Estoppel' doctrines prevent parties from making one claim, then contradicting themselves when that claim proves disadvantageous."
The story also includes a link to the ACLU brief, which is worth reading.
This should be at the top of the news for the next few days. OK, OK: USA beat the Netherlands in the World Cup. Yay!
But after that story, this one should be the most prominent.
tblue37
(65,488 posts)Skraxx
(2,982 posts)bucolic_frolic
(43,294 posts)they are litigating everything, no hesitation, no quit, no errors
Skraxx
(2,982 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,214 posts)Fritz Walter
(4,292 posts)I donated to them last year, and a couple weeks ago they sent me a reminder to renew my gift. Due to my personal cash-flow issues at the time, I ignored it. Will call them Monday morning and specifically mention this case when I renew.
TheBlackAdder
(28,214 posts)trev
(1,480 posts)Skraxx
(2,982 posts)TeamPooka
(24,255 posts)StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)Thanks for posting it!
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)Martin Eden
(12,875 posts)Trump has been packing the courts. A flawed ruling can be appealed, but a safe harbor for that is needed.
Roland99
(53,342 posts)onetexan
(13,061 posts)MFGsunny
(2,356 posts)gristy
(10,667 posts)Ligyron
(7,639 posts)If so, that just flat out encourages being disingenuous.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)I've never seen such lying, at every level, since this faux administration.
calimary
(81,487 posts)I learn all kinds of good and useful things here.
sinkingfeeling
(51,474 posts)dsc
(52,166 posts)but what they definitely have are clients who aren't lying. If you lie to your lawyer then you can have Perry Mason and you still are going to be in big trouble.
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)Ponietz
(3,007 posts)Pleading facts in the alternative merits contempt.
pecosbob
(7,543 posts)Last edited Sun Jul 7, 2019, 02:45 PM - Edit history (1)
...if an ordinary litigant engaged in the conduct DOJ engaged in here, sanctions would be the minimum relief provided.
Isn't the DOJ's privilege to lie in court and before Congress the hallmark of all GOP administrations?
KY_EnviroGuy
(14,494 posts)Thank goodness most courts will not fall for their bullshit.
yortsed snacilbuper
(7,939 posts)Walter Scott
FakeNoose
(32,767 posts)... right up to SCOTUS. Federal judges - regardless of their party affiliation - do not want to be connected with the taint of Chump. Our federal judges aren't stupid, and the vast majority believe in their pledge to uphold the Constitution.
Let these DOJ toadies take responsibility for their partisan lies.
calimary
(81,487 posts)real Cannabis calm
(1,124 posts)BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)Will go down in history as one of the most criminal enterprises in US history. When we restore order in the federal government, there needs to be a reckoning...
RestoreAmerica2020
(3,439 posts)..at the forefront on issues--now looking at their online on site on how to support their efforts.
perdita9
(1,144 posts)I am distraught at the failure of so many of our American institutions. The dishonesty in the Justice department has been particularly galling. Let's hope the courts hold someone responsible for these deplorable actions.
Thomas Hurt
(13,903 posts)elleng
(131,121 posts)They_Live
(3,240 posts)onecaliberal
(32,898 posts)elleng
(131,121 posts)While I don't want to get ahead of myself OR the news OR the process, it is necessary that we (attorneys AND we the people) 'encourage' the Department of Justice to be HONEST, so fine that ACLU's doing this. I may add a few $ to my ACLU allotment.
Delmette2.0
(4,170 posts)that 45 said he could overrule Congress and them with an Executive Order.
Now I'm sending a donation to ACLU!
Gothmog
(145,567 posts)marble falls
(57,236 posts)LiberalLovinLug
(14,176 posts)'Estoppel' doctrines prevent parties from making one claim, then contradicting themselves when that claim proves disadvantageous."
Grasswire2
(13,571 posts)...lend your voice to the cause of liberty!
www.aclu.org
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)Hotler
(11,445 posts)RobertDevereaux
(1,858 posts)Both to ACLU and to Planned Parenthood.
Gothmog
(145,567 posts)saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)Dump rump, a criminal and unAmerican fool
Gothmog
(145,567 posts)Link to tweet
As The Post reports, the change in the legal team might signal legal or ethical concerns about Trumps handling of the affair. One source said such concerns were harbored by some career attorneys.
It gets worse. A Justice Department lawyer tells the New York Times that due to the switch, no lawyers from the division that defends administration policies in court the federal programs branch will be working on the case.
The Times adds that the move strongly suggests that career lawyers decided to quit a case that at the least seemed to lack a legal basis, or worse, could force them to defend statements that could well turn out to be untrue.
Fritz Walter
(4,292 posts)Or at least re-assign other rodents still on board?
Thanks for the update.
Gothmog
(145,567 posts)From the Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/07/08/somtimes-doj-lawyer-must-just-say-no/?utm_term=.8047534f232a
Others agree that swapping out lawyers is highly unusual. Its extraordinary and downright bizarre to see the government parachute in new lawyers at this late stage of the litigation, says legal scholar Joshua Matz. If past is prologue, this may indicate that were about to see some extremely sketchy moves that the existing team was unwilling to take for professional or reputational reasons. That the administration would have to go so far afield, to recruit consumer protection lawyers, suggests that the entire federal programs branch of the Justice Department is unwilling to defend whatever the administration plans to file.
This is not the first time in this presidency a set of lawyers has dropped out of a case brought on specious grounds. In the case seeking to invalidate the entire Affordable Care Act, three career attorneys withdrew without signing onto a brief many considered legally preposterous.....
Not to put too fine a point on it, but what these lawyers do will have profound consequences for the country and their careers. Constitutional scholar Larry Tribe warns, The Department of Justice cannot avoid the long-term credibility cost to its litigating posture of contradicting itself in successive filings simply by changing the names of the career DOJ lawyers on the pleadings or by bringing new faces into court. If thats the aspiration, its not going to succeed.
The new team of lawyers should think very carefully before accepting an assignment from an attorney general not above misrepresenting the work of a special counsel or adopting the role of the presidents private counsel.