HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » A Question for DU Legal E...

Wed Sep 9, 2020, 03:26 PM

A Question for DU Legal Eagles re: DOJ taking over Defamation Case

Can the judge in the case not agree to allow the change?

4 replies, 338 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 4 replies Author Time Post
Reply A Question for DU Legal Eagles re: DOJ taking over Defamation Case (Original post)
leftieNanner Sep 9 OP
The Velveteen Ocelot Sep 9 #1
leftieNanner Sep 9 #2
The Velveteen Ocelot Sep 9 #3
leftieNanner Sep 9 #4

Response to leftieNanner (Original post)

Wed Sep 9, 2020, 03:32 PM

1. Yes. The DoJ filed a motion, which means a judge has to grant it.

What they are trying to do is substitute the United States for Trump as the defendant on the ground that Trump was acting in his capacity as president, in which case the government would be responsible. But since the government can't be considered to commit defamation, the case would have to be dismissed. I'd be amazed if the judge granted the motion, since it's clear that Trump was acting in his personal capacity, trying to fend off Carroll's assertion that he assaulted her by claiming she's a liar. There's no governmental function or interest at issue when a president makes accusations relating to an entirely personal incident that occurred long before he became president. The shorter answer is that it's bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #1)

Wed Sep 9, 2020, 03:53 PM

2. That's what I thought

Thanks for clarifying the issue.

Do we know whether it's a trumpy judge or not?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftieNanner (Reply #2)

Wed Sep 9, 2020, 04:08 PM

3. I haven't been able to find out yet which judge it's been assigned to.

It might not have been assigned yet, since procedurally it's part of a process by which a case is removed from the state court where it was first filed (in New York County, which is Manhattan) to a federal court, in this case the Southern District of New York. A state court case can be removed to a federal court if federal jurisdiction can be established, and here they are claiming that the Federal Tort Claims Act applies to Carrollīs claim because Trump was acting in his capacity as president. On that basis they are also moving to substitute the government as the defendant.

Once a case has been removed from state to federal court, the state court no longer has jurisdiction over the case. However, a federal court can remand the case to state court without any request by the plaintiff if the judge does not believe federal jurisdiction has been properly established by the defendant, and the plaintiff can also move to have the case remanded to state court if the plaintiff does not believe there is a basis for federal jurisdiction. Iīm sure Carroll will oppose the removal and will try to get the case remanded to the state court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #3)

Wed Sep 9, 2020, 04:11 PM

4. Great info

Thank you. This would be a good LOSS for Barr and Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread