Judge Rules Mueller Has Authority to Prosecute Manafort

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by GatorBen, May 15, 2018.

  1. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    Messages:
    3,183
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    313
    Ratings Received:
    +2,939
    Well, I am impressed with your observation! Scalia was not a "conservative" in criminal cases. He often sided with the liberal judges in criminal/constitutional rights case.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  2. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    Messages:
    3,183
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    313
    Ratings Received:
    +2,939
    Judge Jackson cited the Virginia case as part of her discussion of the links. I would be surprised if Judge Ellis rules differently. He was pissed that Mueller's office did not give him the unredacted August 2 memo and was letting Mueller know who is boss. As he said, "I'll be the Judge."
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    Messages:
    3,183
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    313
    Ratings Received:
    +2,939
    If Judge Ellis rules for Manafort, there would likely be a quick appeal to the 4th Circuit unless the government re-indicts Manafort through the local US Attorney's office.

    If the 4th Circuit rules for Manafort, Judge Jackson would likely reconsider her ruling (although the facts are different and those differences might suggest a different result). There would likely be a quick appeal of the 4th Circuit decision to the Supreme Court.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2017
    Messages:
    3,958
    Likes Received:
    599
    Trophy Points:
    393
    Ratings Received:
    +4,475
    But he's currently employed by the government and bringing cases through the government. It's no different in substance than a U.S. Attorney's Office hiring a term AUSA.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2017
    Messages:
    3,958
    Likes Received:
    599
    Trophy Points:
    393
    Ratings Received:
    +4,475
    Agreed. Scalia was an originalist through and through. He wasn't a conservative. Alito is a conservative.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. GatorBen

    GatorBen Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    6,102
    Likes Received:
    816
    Trophy Points:
    563
    Ratings Received:
    +12,335
    Let’s not credit him too much. See Gonzales v. Raich.

    For whatever else you want to think of him, if you want a consistent judicial theory Thomas is probably your shining star example.
  7. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    Messages:
    3,183
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    313
    Ratings Received:
    +2,939
    I did not say he was perfect on these types of cases.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    Messages:
    3,183
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    313
    Ratings Received:
    +2,939
    I said that in post 7.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2017
    Messages:
    3,958
    Likes Received:
    599
    Trophy Points:
    393
    Ratings Received:
    +4,475
    I can't applaud a consistently terrible interpretation of the Constitution.

    I think we can cut Scalia a break for an occasional outlier.
  10. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2017
    Messages:
    3,958
    Likes Received:
    599
    Trophy Points:
    393
    Ratings Received:
    +4,475
    I know, but I just don't see the merit to the argument that you do. I don't see an opening to successfully challenge it.
  11. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2017
    Messages:
    3,958
    Likes Received:
    599
    Trophy Points:
    393
    Ratings Received:
    +4,475
    Yep. Judges don't have a lot of tolerance for being jerked around. People are wrong to assume because a judge chews out one side, he'll side with the other.
    Last edited: May 15, 2018
  12. gatorknights

    gatorknights GC Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    20,540
    Likes Received:
    631
    Trophy Points:
    908
    Location:
    Gainesville, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +3,084
    So we can be confident that in a court of law that judges will be d3p's in other words unbiased whose fiduciary is to the law, not a party in the suit? Dumb question I hope.
  13. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2017
    Messages:
    3,958
    Likes Received:
    599
    Trophy Points:
    393
    Ratings Received:
    +4,475
    Can you elaborate or clarify? I'm not following you here.
  14. gatorknights

    gatorknights GC Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    20,540
    Likes Received:
    631
    Trophy Points:
    908
    Location:
    Gainesville, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +3,084
    I'm saying if you have a case, if you have documentation to support your case, you can trust any judge that gets assigned to that case.
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2017
    Messages:
    3,958
    Likes Received:
    599
    Trophy Points:
    393
    Ratings Received:
    +4,475
    In the federal courts, I'd say yes at least 9.5 out of 10 times.
    • Like Like x 1
  16. gatorknights

    gatorknights GC Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    20,540
    Likes Received:
    631
    Trophy Points:
    908
    Location:
    Gainesville, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +3,084
    LOL I'm guessing judges don't appreciate someone trying to play them. Assuming that someone is able to make into the courtroom.
  17. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2017
    Messages:
    3,958
    Likes Received:
    599
    Trophy Points:
    393
    Ratings Received:
    +4,475
    I'd say the majority of federal judges are good judges and fair people. Another big chunk aren't good judges, but they're fair people. And there are a small minority who aren't good judges or fair people. Some get exposed and shamed off the bench (or removed). Some unfortunately hold onto their job until retirement.

    Good judges know there are cases where they'll have to hold their nose and rule against their personal wishes because the law is the law. The law isn't always fair and just.
    Last edited: May 16, 2018
    • Like Like x 1
  18. gator_fever

    gator_fever GC Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    Messages:
    4,508
    Likes Received:
    529
    Trophy Points:
    343
    Ratings Received:
    +5,882
    If Judge Ellis does rule against the govt he will probably touch on some of her ruling even if he doesnt mention that case directly.

    I wish Sullivan was handling all of Muellers mess as he doesnt play around with the govt trying to play games by withholding evidence etc.
  19. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    60,359
    Likes Received:
    8,691
    Trophy Points:
    2,358
    Ratings Received:
    +36,311
    Doesn't one take precedence over the other? Supremacy Clause? How can one crime be tried by two different courts?
  20. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2017
    Messages:
    3,183
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    313
    Ratings Received:
    +2,939
    The two Federal District Judges (one in Va. and one in DC) are sister courts. Essentially on the same level in the federal court system. They are free to disagree with each other on the law, if they ultimately do. Rulings by the Fourth Circuit, which is the federal appellate court for federal courts in Va. bind courts in the 4th Circuit, but not federal courts in DC (which is in the DC Circuit). But, rulings in the 4th Circuit would be persuasive in the DC District Courts. The Supremacy clause makes federal laws supreme over conflicting state laws or areas occupied by federal law, subject to constitutional considerations such as the Commerce Clause. The Supremacy Clause has no bearing on the Manafort motions and rulings. The judges could render different rulings if they see the cases differently. Judge Ellis has not yet ruled. He may see the facts in rje case in Va., which charges different crimes in a different way than the Judge in DC saw them. There is great commonality in the legal arguments, however, many of which have been made in other special counsel cases.
    Last edited: May 16, 2018
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1