Category: Uncategorized

The ACLU Has Its TRO In Colorado. Trump Cannot Rely On Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

This was published late evening, on Earth Day — by the able USDC Judge Sweeney, in the federal district courthouse, in Denver. And it’s a peach!

Again, Team Tangerine sought to mis-apply a “war power” statute — contorting it beyond recognition — to run deportation pogroms. This gambit is now enjoined, nationwide. Here’s a bit of the powerfully-reasoned 65 pager:

…According to Petitioners, the Proclamation exceeds the President’s “statutory authority in three critical respects.” ECF No. 2 at 11. First, there is no “invasion or predatory incursion.” Id. Second, any purported invasion is not perpetuated by a “foreign government or nation.” Id. And third, there is “no process to contest whether an individual falls within the Proclamation.” Id. Skepticism of the Proclamation’s contrary findings is required, Petitioners urge, to the point of satisfying their first TRO burden. Id.; see also M.G., 117 F.4th at 1238. The Court agrees.

Petitioners’ first argument, see ECF No. 2 at 12, proceeds from a straightforward premise. The President’s authority under the Proclamation is “vested” under the Act. The Act demands, as a “statutory requirement,” an “invasion or predatory incursion.” ECF No. 12; 50 U.S.C. § 21. And because the Act’s “text and history” use these terms “to refer to military actions indicative of an actual or impending war” — not “mass illegal migration” or “criminal activities” — the Act cannot sustain the Proclamation. ECF No. 2 at 12-13. The Court agrees with Petitioners….

Excellent! And Musk will now need to step away from 1600 Penn / DOGE — since Tesla’s Q1 results reveal a company… in free-fall. That is about 75% of Elon’s remaining net worth — and he owes the independent public shareholders his full time efforts, under applicable fiduciary duty doctrines there now.

As I say… excellent, indeed.

नमस्ते

“And Texas… Needs Rain”: Hinderaker Wants To Be Relevant, Again, 25 Years Later. But His 15 Min. Are Long Gone.

~ condor ~ 2 Comments

Just a few lines on this: as it is silly, in spades — but John still wants people to see him as the guy who took down Dan Rather, and now, 60 Minutes.

The problem is that all his supposed “heroism” was… um, a quarter century ago — and trivial at that.

Still, he clout-chases / claims fame — when a guy leaves 60 Minutes… in 2025.

Hilariously… sad.

And Now, USDC Judge Paula Xinis In Maryland Just Called Noem’s (And Trump’s) Positions Out — As Having Been “Taken In Bad Faith”. That Means Contempt Lies Ahead.

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

Well — as they say in the old Spaghetti Westerns… “there will be… blood.”

And it will likely come from the stupid, gullible, and inexperienced political appointee attorneys who’ve stood up in court for Noem and Rubio and Trump — and defiled their oaths of candor and good faith advocacy, before the federal judge, here. Damn. There’s much more in this barbed eight page rebuke of an order tonight — but here’s the sharpest end of Judge Xinis’ stick:

…Defendants [Trump / Noem / Rubio] — and their counsel — well know that the falsehood lies not in any supposed “premise,” but in their continued mischaracterization of the Supreme Court’s Order. That Order made clear that this Court “properly required the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.” See Noem v. Abrego Garcia, 604 U.S. –– (2025), slip op. at 2; see also Abrego Garcia v. Noem, No. 25-1404, 2025 WL 1135112, at *1 (4th Cir. Apr. 17, 2025). Defendants’ objection reflects a willful and bad faith refusal to comply with discovery obligations. The objection is overruled.

Defendants are therefore ordered to supplement their answers in full compliance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Their answers must include facts responsive to the requests, not oblique and incomplete, non-specific characterizations. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(3) (requiring that each interrogatory be answered “fully”)….

Equally specious, Defendants’ objections on the grounds of privilege are rejected. Defendants invoke in name only a range of protections — attorney-client privilege, the work-product doctrine, the deliberative process privilege, the state secrets privilege, and an undefined “governmental privilege” — without providing any supporting information or analysis. As Defendants and their counsel know, the proponent of a privilege must demonstrate the legal and factual bases to invoke the protections that such privilege affords….

Given that this Court expressly warned Defendants and their counsel to adhere strictly to their discovery obligations, see Hr’g Tr. 11:24–12:2, Apr. 16, 2025 (“Because in fairness, Mr. Ensign, [if] you’re not going to answer the questions that the plaintiffs put within the scope of my order, then you’ll justify why. You’ll cite privilege, you’ll follow the rules, I’ll make a determination.”), their boilerplate, non-particularized objections are presumptively invalid and reflect a willful refusal to comply with this Court’s Discovery Order and governing rules. ECF No. 79. Although Defendants state now that they are willing to “meet and confer” with counsel about the production of such a log, ECF No. 98-1 at 23, their repeated refusals to meet and confer about much of anything else undermine the reliability of this assertion. ECF No. 98 at 2. The Court thus finds this offer was not made in good faith.

Nor does the Court find Defendants’ protestations regarding the abbreviated time-line persuasive. For weeks, Defendants have sought refuge behind vague and unsubstantiated assertions of privilege, using them as a shield to obstruct discovery and evade compliance with this Court’s orders….

[This all] ends now. If Defendants want to preserve their privilege claims, they must support them with the required detail. Otherwise, they will lose the protections they failed to properly invoke. Accordingly, by no later than 6:00 PM [tomorrow] on April 23, 2025, Defendants shall supplement their answers and responses to provide the specific legal and factual bases for each asserted privilege and produce a privilege log that fully complies with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this Court’s Local Rules….

Given the context of this case, Defendants have failed to respond in good faith, and their refusal to do so can only be viewed as willful and intentional noncompliance. Defendants must supplement their answer to include all individuals involved as requested in this interrogatory….

[Garcia’s counsel is entitled to know] the complete factual bases for Defendants’ assertion that Abrego Garcia is a member of MS-13, Defendants’ relevancy and scope objections are rejected. Defendants have previously articulated in their daily updates as to Abrego Garcia’s custodial status and his potential return that DHS would eventually take Abrego Garcia into custody and either remove him to another country or terminate withholding of removal because of his purported “membership in MS-13, a designated foreign terrorist organization.” ECF No. 77 at 2. Defendants cannot invoke the moniker of MS-13 as responsive to the Court’s previous order, ECF No. 77 at 1–2, then object to follow-up interrogatories seeking the factual bases for the same. Defendants must supplement this answer….

Stay tuned — for fireworks, tomorrow at 5 PM EDT — after the second day of Mr. Mazzaro’s deposition. Today was the first one. Out, grinning.

नमस्ते

[U: Filed Under Seal.] Surprising No One — Mr. Mazzaro’s Daily Sworn Statement… Is LATE AGAIN!

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

I think he’s only been ahead of — or… on deadline — once twice, in the ten days… since this ordered reporting was started. Update — at about 7 PM Eastern time, a one page declaration was submitted, saying that this status report was filed under seal and within the chambers of the judge exclusively.

Honestly, that could mean almost anything. But I will be hopeful that that means Mr. Abrego Garcia is either on his way home already, or will be shortly, due to a negotiated agreement. Sigh.

…Defendants provide Notice that Defendants submitted today’s daily status report to the Court confidentially and under seal for in camera review….

More here, as and when… we get it….

Separately, the able judge has ordered the government to answer all outstanding discovery requests by 6 PM EDT, tomorrow, and also had Mr. Garcia’s counsel narrow a couple of their discovery requests. Those are due by 9 PM this evening. Stay tuned.

नमस्ते

Hinderaker Ignores The Essential Truth: Trump Said He’d “Solve” Ukraine In Under 30 Days. He Lied.

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

As ever, Hinderaker this afternoon is burping about the fact that the New York Times missed a preposition in a quote — and then corrected it. Promptly.

What he completely ignores, but what all of us in the sentient world know… Is that Donald Trump said over and over again on the campaign trail that he would bring peace to Ukraine (sometimes he said within 24 hours), but most of the time, he said within 30 days.

Month four is now ending. And peace seems quite a distance beyond where it was on Joe Biden’s watch. This is so because Donald Trump is both irrational and impulsive.

And the essential truth of the NYT reporting remains: Trump seems to favor Putin in these negotiations rather than the freedom fighters in Ukraine.

Trump has said more than once that the war is “the fault” of Ukraine. In point of fact, Putin invaded Ukraine.

So — ever pedantic, John points to the splinter — in someone’s eye while he ignores the lumber in his own.

What a putz.

[U] Sarah Palin Loses, AGAIN! — In Her Quixotic Quests, To Claim The NYT Libeled Her. Hilarious!

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

Updated: Hinderaker is apparently unaware that Palin had to sue somewhere where she could get personal jurisdiction over the editorial’s actual author, as she insisted on pursuing a personal liability theory; not just a corporate one (NYT). She wanted to punish the actual author of an OPINION piece. That’s why she lost twice, John. Not because it was a “Democrat” jury — but because she’s an odious… witch. The author would never have a need to set foot in Alaska — see, John? Her own bitter need for vengeance did her in, man. End, update.

Late last year, she was granted a new trial on limited issues by the Second Circuit. Before the capable USDC Judge Jed Rakoff, she has had yet another jury empaneled, in Manhattan. And… this afternoon — they came back with ANOTHER verdict exonerating the NYT.

That’s oh-for-three for old Sarah “I can see Russia from my font yard” Palin. And I love it. Here’s the bit from InnerCityPress, live, in the courtroom:

…All rise! Judge Rakoff: We have a verdict. File it as Court Exhibit 1. Jury entering!

Judge Rakoff: I will not comment on the verdict — but on what a good jury you have been. I will open the verdict envelope….

Foreperson: Defendants not liable….

This was an editorial — an OPINION piece. It suggested that Palin’s 2017 rhetoric was causing violence. That is an opinion — not a false statement. So, she lost. Afterall, you cannot libel garbage… by saying it stinks. Truth is an absolute defense. Onward — again!

नमस्ते

Power Alley: Merck v. Merck Hearing Now Late June 2025… In Newark’s Federal District Courthouse.

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

Do search “Lanham Act” in quotes in the box here, for the background — and about 260 posts on it all, here. Heh.

This was just published — in Cause No. 16-cv-266, USDC NJ Dist., as a text only order, from the able USDC Judge Salas:

…TEXT ORDER:

The oral argument on Defendants’ motions in limine (D.E. Nos. [261], [262], [264], [268], [269] & [271]) is hereby rescheduled to Thursday, 06/26/2025, at 01:00 PM in Newark – Courtroom 5A before Judge Esther Salas.

So Ordered by Judge Esther Salas on 4/22/2025….

Now you know. What a crazy, century-long dispute (since the end of WWI, and the 1917 Treaty of Versailles!) this has (now) been.

नमस्ते

“So Soon, Old Pete?! Gee We Hardly… Knew Ya’.” Actually — We Took The Measure Of This Man — Long Ago. And, He Was Found… Wanting.

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

Yep — he didn’t last even four months. He was never a serious candidate for any job, of national prominence — in truth. Except to go get drunk (frat boy style!) with John Hinderaker, it would seem.

Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy. He’s a serial abuser, drunk and miscreant — all not-so… “allegedly“. Here’s the NPR exclusive, sourced to three people inside Tangerine 2.0’s circle — and a bit:

…The White House has begun the process of looking for a new leader at the Pentagon to replace Pete Hegseth, according to a U.S. official who was not authorized to speak publicly. This comes as Hegseth is again mired in controversy over sharing military operational details in a group chat.

The defense secretary is under fire after revelations that he shared classified information in a group chat with his wife, brother and lawyer, according to the official.

The source said Hegseth used the Signal messaging app on his personal smartphone, detailing minute-by-minute classified information about airstrikes on Houthi targets in Yemen. It happened at about the same time in March that Hegseth shared similar details with top White House officials in a different Signal chat group that accidentally included a journalist. That leak, hours before air strikes hit, could have endangered U.S. pilots if that information about the timing of strikes was intercepted by U.S. adversaries. Already the Houthis have twice shot down American predator drones.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt denied that there’s an effort to replace Hegseth, posting on X that President Trump “stands strongly” behind him. Speaking to reporters at the White House, Trump backed Hegseth and said concerns over the Signal chats are a “waste of time.”

New Hampshire Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said in a statement that Hegseth should accept responsibility.

“But we must not forget that ultimate responsibility here lies with President Trump for selecting a former weekend TV host, without any experience successfully leading a large and complex organization, to run our government’s biggest department and make life and death decisions for our military and country,” she said….

What a chaotic, dangerous clown show — and a malignantly-lethal one — at that.

नमस्ते

Hmm. Hinderaker Ought To Watch… “Conclave”. Period.

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

I will only waste a few lines on this: Hinderaker, who was never, ever a Catholic — and thus fundamentally MIS-understands the nature of that version of the Christian Gospels — deems himself worthy… to “pontificate“ (yep — let’s go there!), about what is required of the College of Cardinals, in qualifying the NEXT Pope.

Holy Sh!t. What an… ass. [Hinderaker’s supposed “faith” excises the social gospel from his New Testament — entirely. Catholics, to a person… should honor, obey and live… Matthew 23:11 et seq. As Francis and John XIII did.]

And other than to mention that Candace Owens, who claims to be a recent convert to the “Latin/Roman” Rites of Catholicism (and by that she simply means the part of the church that cooperated with… Hitler!)… has not said a word of praise for the departed pontiff… I will now fall silent.

It is odd that John and Candace in particular heap nothing but praise on the most strident elements of the Israeli clergy… but fall silent when real American Catholics say they loved Popes John the XIII, and Francis.

Breaking: In A Biden-Era “Self-Removal” Case, A Solid Majority Of The Supremes Sees “More Permissive” Intentions, Where Removal / Asylum / Self-Deportation Are Concerned.

~ condor ~ Leave a comment

The tides have already turned, dear readers. Tangerine 2.0, and Rubio and Noem… should take note. [But they won’t — so they’ll reap the whirlwind, shortly.]

This was a solid majoity decision (only the predictable, myopic Thomas / Alito pair are fundamentally objecting to the overall “equitable” outcome, here), holding that a use of a hyper-technical, mistaken “deadline” quip / procedure will not defeat a federal court’s right / obligation to review whether the government is honoring the rights enshrined in our statutes, rules and yes… Constitution:

…[See INS] §§1252(a)(1), (b)(9). . . . [P]retty plainly, that language permits a court to review all terms in a final order of removal without anything like the qualification the government imagines. Our dissenting colleagues see things differently. In their view, this Court’s decision in Nasrallah v. Barr, 590 U. S. 573 (2020), requires us to adopt the government’s jurisdictional theory. See post, at 8–10 (opinion of THOMAS, J.); post, at 2 (opinion of BARRETT, J.). But, if anything, that case supports our conclusion. Nasrallah described a “final order of removal” subject to judicial review as a final order “‘concluding that the alien is deportable or ordering deportation.’” 590 U. S., at 581. And (again) that is exactly what we have here: a final order specifying that the government may remove Mr. Monsalvo if he fails to depart voluntarily within 60 days, and a petition asking the courts to settle a dispute over what that order means….

Tellingly, too, if Congress meant to depart from settled immigration practice when it adopted the voluntary-departure deadline in 1996, the government itself seems not to have noticed. After Congress enacted IIRIRA, the government promulgated a new rule to enforce §1229c(b)(2)’s terms. See 62 Fed. Reg. 10312, 10372 (1997). Tracking the statute, that rule allows an immigration judge to grant a voluntary-departure period of up to “60 days.” 8 CFR §240.26(e) (1999). And under the government’s own regulations, remember, regulatory deadlines defined in terms of days do not expire on weekends or legal holidays. §1001.1(h) (2021). Nowhere does the government’s rule enforcing §1229c(b)(2) suggest that it is exempt from these regulations. Perhaps for this reason, the immigration judge in Mr. Monsalvo’s own case understood his voluntary departure deadline to extend past a weekend to a Monday.

See supra, at 3. Perhaps for this reason, as well, many other immigration judges have done the same in other cases. See Brief for American Immigration Lawyers Association as Amicus Curiae 4 (collecting examples)….

There are silver linings, even on this gray day — and Trump is about to have his ears trimmed, in the coming weeks — by a majority of right thinking US Supreme Court Justices (probably seven of them!)… particularly on human rights, and due process dimensions.

नमस्ते