Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

onetexan

onetexan's Journal
onetexan's Journal
February 2, 2017

Virginia Just Filed A Contempt Motion Against Trump Over Immigration Order

Source: Huffington Post

The Commonwealth of Virginia asked a federal judge late Wednesday night to force President Donald Trump, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and top government officials to show why they shouldn’t be held in contempt for failing to obey a lawful court order.

The temporary restraining order issued Saturday night by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia required Customs and Border Protection to allow attorneys access to legal permanent residents that CBP had detained at Dulles International Airport as a result of Trump’s executive order blocking people from seven Muslim-majority nations from traveling to the U.S. Saturday’s court order also forbade CBP from deporting any of the legal permanent residents ― also known as green-card holders ― detained at Dulles for seven days. When federal judges rule against the government, any official implicated in the order, including the president, is supposed to obey ― even if they believe the court’s order is incorrect.

But as The Huffington Post reported this weekend, CBP did not comply with the court’s order. The border agency never let attorneys near the people it was detaining. And when Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) and at least four other members of Congress tried to get CBP to comply at various points over the weekend, CBP defied them.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/virginia-trump-contempt_us_5892bb6ae4b070cf8b80b621?



I hope this is the beginning of the unraveling...
January 31, 2017

Slate article: What happens if Donald Trump refuses a federal court order

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/01/what_happens_if_donald_trump_refuses_a_federal_court_order.html

"The situation has forced observers to reckon with a question that has little or no precedent in American history: What happens when the federal government or its agents refuse to honor a court order handed down by a federal judge? By definition, it has to be different from what happens when, say, a state lawmaker flouts the word of a federal judge, since in the past, such cases have involved the president himself sending in the U.S. Marshals to enforce the law. But who will be on what side if things escalate, and the executive branch itself explicitly and continuously refuses to follow the rulings of the judiciary? At what point does the conflict turn into a full-blown constitutional crisis?

“If the reports are true, there are a couple paths to escalate,” said University of Chicago Law School professor William Baude. Before it gets to that point, though, attempts will have to be made by the judges in question to clarify what they intended with their orders and how exactly officials might be in violation of them. “Most likely,” Baude said, “there will be several rounds of brinksmanship before this rises to the level of a constitutional crisis.”

According to Doug Laycock, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, the likelihood that we would see fines or jail time even if a contempt order did come down is very slim—in large part because neither the judge, nor the government, has any interest in having the situation devolve to that point. “Judges are much more likely to threaten sanctions than to actually impose them,” Laycock wrote in an email. What typically happens instead—and it’s worth noting that “typically” here refers to much less fraught circumstances than the ones we face today—is that the judge “tries to keep ramping up the pressure, but tries to avoid reaching the point where he has no choice but to send someone to jail.”

What happens if Trump and his people simply decline to back down, even after a judge gives them an opportunity to comply? According to Waldman, that’s when a judge could call the U.S. Marshals in to enforce the order. In the case of Dulles, that could mean pitting U.S. Marshals against armed agents at airports. “This,” Waldman wrote, “is what sets us up for a darker, dangerous turn.”
January 24, 2017

2 Journalists Covering Inauguration Protests Face Felony Riot Charges

Source: Huffington Post

Two journalists arrested while covering President Donald Trump’s inauguration in Washington have been charged with felony rioting, an accusation one of their employers called an “affront to the First Amendment.”

Evan Engel of Vocativ and Alexander Rubinstein of RT America were among more than 200 people arrested during anti-Trump demonstrations Friday, The Guardian reports. Most of those people face felony rioting charges, according to CBS.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/journalists-inauguration-protests-felony-riot-charges_us_5887ca89e4b0441a8f71888b?yipmegevaw2ep14i&



Holy crap the crackdown on reporters began inauguration day.
November 7, 2016

Kurt Eichenwald: FBI Director James Comey Is Unfit for Public Service

Source: Newsweek

"The FBI is an investigative arm of the Department of Justice. Nothing more, nothing less. An extremely small minority are lawyers, or even have basic legal training. They do not—thank God—decide who gets indicted and who doesn’t. Prosecutors run criminal cases and direct the agents. As many prosecutors have told me over the years, there is almost never an instance where agents who have been investigating a case for months do not recommend for prosecution. Tunnel vision is one reason; the fact that agents rise in the ranks by delivering cases that lead to prosecution is another. That is why prosecutors—and through them, grand juries—make the decision to charge or not. They both serve as a backstop to agents who don’t know the law and have no ability to objectively review their own evidence... What that means is, if the FBI does not even conclude it has enough evidence to write a memo recommending prosecution to the Justice Department, there is simply nothing there. Assuming someone committed a crime when the FBI concludes the evidence obtained in the investigation is not worth turning over to prosecutors is like assuming it must be raining when the skies are clear.

The FBI is never supposed to comment on ongoing investigations and, except in exceptional circumstances, never disclose whether it has or has not recommended prosecution. Instead, on indictment, prosecutors stand up at a press conference, announce the charges, then thank the agents and offices of the FBI who conducted the investigation. If the bureau does not develop enough evidence to merit even a recommendation for prosecution, in those exceptional circumstances where it says anything, those are the words officials use: We have not developed evidence that merits a recommendation for prosecution.

In the last few months, unfortunately, Comey has demonstrated he understands none of this. He has broken these rules time and again, leaving himself in the position where he decided he had to break them a couple of more times. He has acted with a lack of accountability that has not been seen since J. Edgar Hoover held the post. It is unforgiveable."


Read more: http://www.newsweek.com/fbi-director-james-comey-unfit-public-service-517815



Egregious abuse of power by Comey...'nough said.

Profile Information

Member since: Mon Oct 31, 2016, 08:09 PM
Number of posts: 13,165
Latest Discussions»onetexan's Journal