Imagine what the right would be screaming if Biden shook down Jay Sekulow, Alan Dershowitz, Pat Cippoline, etc. for pro bono services.
win for the good guys. so obvious Firm Behind Fox News Lawsuit Lands Big Win in Battle Against Trump A judge handed President Donald Trump a fresh loss by blocking most of his executive order against yet another big law firm he tried to push around. Susman Godfrey, the firm behind a successful $787 million defamation lawsuit against Fox News, was granted a temporary restraining order Tuesday by U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan.
This is what I would have expected from any large firm worth its salt instead of caving to authoritarianism: "Perkins Coie is one of a number of firms that Trump has targeted with an executive order for representing anti-Trump clients in the past — in this case, Fusion GPS, which helped finance the so-called Steele Dossier investigating Trump's ties to Russia in 2016. The order directs an investigation of Perkins Coie's hiring practices and prohibits them from representing the federal government in legal affairs or accessing government buildings. The Justice Department, however tried to throw up a technical roadblock to the lawsuit: advising the court that Perkins Coie cannot sue the executive branch in the abstract, and it is their opinion if an injunction is issued in the case, it can only apply to federal agencies and officers who are explicitly named in the complaint. Perkins Coie responded with a huge amendment to their complaint. "In the law firm executive order cases, DOJ says an injunction barring implementation will only be enforceable against the govt agencies named in the complaint," wrote Lawfare's Roger Parloff. "So Perkins Coie just amended its complaint to name all the relevant fed agencies. The case caption is now 40 pages long." 'Play dumb games, win dumb prizes': Law firm hits back at Trump DOJ with creative tactic
loved the 60 minutes piece last night. referred to trump as "the convicted felon" whp avoided trial by gaming his habeus corpus rights... also ripped djt for the attack on the legal profession and now the little racist miller ahs his pro bono groups that they extorted suing the supreme court for deciding what is legal or not is this jsut an end run to try and disqualify him or do they seriously want to open up all supreme court communications to foia? Trump-aligned group sues Chief Justice John Roberts in effort to restrict power of the courts A pro-Trump legal group founded by White House aide Stephen Miller is suing Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts — a long-shot move as Trump allies fight court rulings blocking key actions from the Oval Office. The lawsuit was filed by the America First Legal Foundation against Roberts in his capacity as the official head of the U.S. Judicial Conference and Robert J. Conrad, who serves as the director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. The complaint accuses both the U.S. Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts of performing certain regulatory actions that go beyond the scope of resolving cases or controversies, or administratively supporting those actions, which they argue are the "core functions" of the judiciary. It also argues that records held by the Roberts-led U.S. Judicial Conference should therefore be subject to the Freedom of Information Act requests, or FOIA requests, as a result.
I hope this encourages other firms to try and negate whatever BS agreement they entered into. A judge used Trump’s own words to expose his real agenda In issuing a permanent injunction halting the enforcement of President Donald Trump’s executive order targeting the law firm Perkins Coie, U.S. Judge Beryl Howell ruled that the order singled out Perkins Coie based on the content of its speech and actions. To conclude that the order infringed upon the First Amendment rights of Perkins Coie and its clients, Howell unsurprisingly relied upon the text of the president’s order and the accompanying “fact sheet” from his administration. But she also did something else far more unusual: Howell used Trump’s subsequent agreements with other firms — and his boasts about them — as evidence against his administration. In determining whether Trump’s order was “unconstitutional retaliation for plaintiff’s First Amendment protected activity,” Howell accepted the firm’s allegations that it had lost business — which the administration did not contest. But she also went further, turning to the administration’s deals with other law firms. .................. In addition to noting the White House’s promotion of the agreements with these other firms, Howell also referenced the president’s own statements on the issue. She quoted, for example, his remarks at an event in early April: Have you noticed that lots of law firms have been signing up with Trump? $100 million, another $100 million, for damages that they’ve done. But they give you $100 million and then they announce, ‘We have done nothing wrong.’ And I agree, they’ve done nothing wrong. But what the hell, they’ve given me a lot of money considering they’ve done nothing wrong. Powell also cited Trump and adviser Stephen Miller’s remarks during the signing of an order targeting the law firm Susman Godfrey. At the event, Trump asked Miller to share the value of free legal work secured from the deals with other law firms. “The numbers are adding up. We’re going to be close to a billion soon,” Miller replied. “As to the Susman EO he had just signed,” Howell wrote, “President Trump then said, ‘this one, we’re just starting the process with this one.’”
It’s gonna be fun watching him come to the realization that a whole lot of those pro bono commitments are gonna involve those firms suing his administration.
then he can issue a new EO, that is what the clowns didn't seem to or want to understand. if they are going to bend the knee once he can then call them up anytime to service him as he pleases or amend their deal as he pleases or new EO. National security you know...
I wouldn’t count on any of them coming to the table a second time if he repudiates the deals he already struck. For at least some of the settling firms the appealing points (aside from dropping the EEOC investigations) were that they really weren’t being asked to do anything they weren’t already doing, and the administration doesn’t get the power to dictate what cases they accept.
I was surprised to learn that as well. He just wants to claim victory over big law, but the devil is in the details.
Lol... basic civics... You vote communism. Tell me about civics You don't even know that you vote for communism every time you cast your vote. Here's some "civics" that you still will not care to understand.
Bondi really sold herself out. her and rubio. thought they had more self respect than they have shown 150 Former Judges Tell Pam Bondi They're Not 'Deranged' A group of more than 150 retired state and federal judges sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi on Monday condemning the Trump administration’s attacks on the judiciary, saying it’s clear the president believes he can “threaten and intimidate” judges into submitting to his agenda. The letter focuses largely on the recent courthouse arrest of Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Hannah Dugan, whom FBI Director Kash Patel accused of helping an undocumented immigrant “evade arrest” and posted a photo of her perp walk on social media. “The circumstances of Judge Dugan’s arrest make it clear that it was nothing but an effort to threaten and intimidate the state and federal judiciaries into submitting to the Administration, instead of interpreting the Constitution and laws of the United States,” the letter states, saying it was highly concerning that officers arrested Dugan in her own courtroom without any warning. “There was no emergency whatsoever; the administration could have easily issued a summons for Judge Dugan to appear before a court, as they would have done in other white collar cases,” the letter said.
No that surprised about Bondi. After she received a large and illegal campaign contribution from Trump Florida withdrew as a plaintiff in the lawsuit against Trump University. She also represented him in the impeachment trial. "Little Marco" on the other hand has done a complete 180. After vigorously criticizing Trump in the 2016 campaign he has gone all out MAGA in the tradition of Lindsey Graham and JD Vance. At one time I thought that Rubio represented the future of the party, not so anymore. If the Republican Party should return to its pre-MAGA roots as the party of Reagan and George W. Bush Marco's political future is over.
Washington lawyer sues Trump administration over revocation of security clearance WASHINGTON (AP) — A prominent Washington attorney sued the Trump administration Monday over the revocation of his security clearance, calling it an act of “improper political retribution” that jeopardizes his ability to continue representing clients in sensitive national security cases. The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington, challenges a March presidential memorandum that singled out attorney Mark Zaid and 14 other individuals who the White House asserted were unsuitable to retain their clearances because it was “no longer in the national interest.” The list included targets of Trump's fury from both the political and legal spheres, including former Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, New York Attorney General Letitia James, former President Joe Biden and members of his family. “By implementing the Memorandum, Defendants have strayed far afield of any deference granted to them by existing case law. Instead, they have launched a bald-faced attack on a sacred constitutional guarantee: the right to petition the court or federal agencies on behalf of clients,” the lawsuit states. “An attack on this right is especially insidious because it jeopardizes Mr. Zaid’s ability to pursue and represent the rights of others without fear of retribution.” The lawsuit was filed by a team of lawyers including Abbe Lowell, a veteran Washington lawyer who last week announced that he was opening his own legal practice and would represent targets of Trump's retribution. Other clients include James, the New York attorney general, as well as Miles Taylor, who served in Trump's first administration and was later revealed to be the author of an anonymous New York Times op-ed in 2018 that was sharply critical of Trump. Trump last month directed the Justice Department to investigate Taylor's activities.
Game changing DC Circuit Court of Appeals Ruling made on Saturday, 5/3: Wow: D.C. Circuit Hands Trump Administration a Huge Win That Will Have Far-Reaching Implications This is for those who have yet to come to terms with the lawfare as started by Obama and then put on steroids by Biden. The SCOTUS has also scheduled 5/15 to consider the abuse of power by the federal district court judges. Fox contributor John Yoo briefly mentioned the SCOTUS date on the Mark Levin Show on Sunday. Based on how this decision was handed down, lawfare through the federal district judges will be coming to an end. It is hard for me to believe the DC Circuit Court of Appeals decision wasn't made with a nod from SCOTUS. It has been eerily quiet with no chirping coming from the Trump Administration and conservative media. The lamestream media and dems are too deep into TDS to realize this is coming down the pike. It's like the Trump Administration knows when to be quiet and let this play out. The wow in the decision is that the appeals court ruled in favor of the Trump Administration but also handed down 3 rules the court expects the federal district judges to abide by in future rulings. The rules are in favor of the executive and against the lawfare abuse of power by the federal district judges. Apparently, the US is likely going to avoid a constitutional crisis created by the rogue federal district court judges who think they are above the constitution and the law. The Trump administration scored a HUGE win on Saturday in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Not only did the court grant the administration's request for a stay pending appeal in several consolidated/related cases, but it set forth the framework that district courts should be adhering to in analyzing many of the cases currently pending before them regarding the administration's actions. We've somewhat been waiting for the Supreme Court to weigh in a bit more forcefully to steer their wayward lower court brethren back on course. I hadn't really expected the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to take up that mantle, but in this order and opinion, they did. https://storage.courtlistener.com/r...991/gov.uscourts.cadc.41991.01208736131.0.pdf In sum, the ruling holds that the courts do not have jurisdiction over personnel decisions (those belong in front of the Merit Systems Protection Board), do not have jurisdiction over grant terminations (those belong in front of the Court of Claims), and the failure to require a bond for the injunction will cause irreparable harm to the government. As the thread rightly notes, this ruling firmly highlights critical jurisdictional issues that many of the district court judges have been blithely hand-waving away and, even more critically, reminds the courts that just as the executive needs to follow the law, so, too, do the courts.
Not sure I would put a ton of stock in the analysis of someone who admits her goal is to reassure readers that Trump is going to prevail.
It would seem that the pro bono agreements with the law firms who capitulated to Trump contained language that was broad enough that the firms don't have to agree to take any cases referred by the administration:
A Texas lawyer gave advice to an immigrant family caught up in an ICE raid. Agents visited him, and then he was fired Jackson agreed to give them informal pro bono support in his personal capacity, not as an in-house lawyer for Fidelity National Financial, a multi-billion dollar Fortune 500 title insurance company. “My goal was to try to find somebody just to be a conduit for them, to alleviate their immediate concerns and fear, give them just some basic understanding of what this is and how this may play out, and then try to find them with a good lawyer,” he told The Independent. Then two people he says appeared to be federal law enforcement agents visited Jackson himself.Two plain-clothed agents appeared at his home and accused Jackson of obstructing an investigation, he said. Jackson talked to formerWashington Post columnist Radley Balko about the people he believed were ICE agents arriving at his door. That article, which did not mention where Jackson worked, was published April 23. That same day, Jackson was fired.
