The judge threatened to sanction the IG lawyers if they didn’t immediately rescind the request for an emergency hearing because she’s so busy with other cases caused by Trump.
As our democracy teeters on the brink, what’s important is following decorum and protocol.
As our democracy teeters on the brink, what’s important is following decorum and protocol.
The inspectors general in this case had argued that a judge’s order this week to temporarily reinstate another government watchdog — Hampton Dellinger, the head of the Office of Special Counsel — while that court challenge progresses had supported their own request to have the inspectors general immediately reinstated while their case proceeds.
But Reyes deemed that argument flimsy and scolded the plaintiffs for making it. Dellinger, Reyes said, leads an independent agency, and Trump needs a strong reason to remove him. In comparison, Reyes said, Trump needs only to provide Congress with 30 days’ notice and a written explanation to remove an inspector general. She added that even if she had immediately reinstated the watchdogs Friday, the president could simply move to have them fired again after 30 days.
So the IGs didn’t make a strong argument…
In particular, Reyes admonished the plaintiffs for waiting 21 days after the inspectors general were fired to request a temporary restraining order, an emergency motion that requires the court to move immediately to hear the case because the matter is so urgent.
Using the legal parlance for a temporary restraining order, she continued, “Are we really here right now on the sixth hearing of this day for me to decide whether to grant a TRO given the circumstances that you guys could not even bother filing a TRO for 21 days?”
And they waited 3 weeks to do it. The judge making them take the slower route seems reasonable.
All those things can be true and it’s still an argument on procedural grounds that loses the forest for the trees. Why were they fired? Was that firing legal? For example, the firings prima facie did not follow the statute that she cites about 30 days’ notice. This slow judicial response has resulted in an almost complete inability for the system to effectively respond to internal threats over the last 8 years.
The judge needs a motion in front of them to consider. Waiting 21 days to ask for a temporary restraining order in an action that would take effect after 30 days shows a lack of urgency on the part of the plaintiffs and the burden was on the plaintiffs to show urgency in the case.
This is like a little kid watching their brother eat their candy for five minutes, then complaining to their parents when the candy is almost gone.
Don’t get me wrong, Trump’s actions here were illegal, but the plaintiffs needed to bring their motion for a TRO fast enough that it wasn’t nearly moot by the time they did.
I don’t believe such a reason has been given. The 30 day timer hasn’t started yet
So putting a stop, even temporarily, to plainly illegal actions by government official(s) is unreasonable if the illegal actions aren’t illegal enough? And “illegal enough” doesn’t include “taking one of the biggest ever steps to remove one of the largest barriers to corruption”
And that’s… Reasonable?
I think the point is, the plaintiffs are telling the judge “this is of the utmost urgency” 21 days after the fact. The judge feels that, if the plaintiffs really felt that it was that urgent they should have acted with urgency themselves. So the judge is giving their request the same level of urgency that they did themselves.
If they had made a similar motion the day after the firing took place, their motion might have been granted, but this seems like a case of “too little too late”.
Fuck the judge’s feelings though, “if it really was that important you should have complained harder” is an insane take from the worst kind of bad teacher attitude.
It has nothing to do with the jusldge’s feelings.whats the point in issuing a Temporary Restraining Order 21 days after the fact when it is moot 30 days after? A TRO on day 1 would have made sense. A TRO on day 21 does nothing but add to the chaos. They are still going forward with other legal arguments but the TRO served no purpose at this point.
The judge hasn’t yet decided whether the actions are illegal. If they are, then they will ultimately be put to a stop.
But for now, the question at hand is whether there is an emergency. That is a completely separate from whether the actions are illegal.
And if you wait three weeks to declare an emergency, then it’s not an emergency.
In comparison, Reyes said, Trump needs only to provide Congress with 30 days’ notice and a written explanation to remove an inspector general.
She cites the legal procedure in her comments declining the motion. If that’s not an acknowledgement of the illegality of what happened instead, what is?
Everyone agrees IGs can be removed after 30 days notice.
The legal question is whether in some cases they can be removed without 30 days notice. Team Trump argues they can, the IGs argue the only way they can be removed is with 30 days notice.
The judge has to decide who’s right. Probably the IGs, but at this point it’s too late to reinstate them. So instead the IGs will have to argue for money damages.
I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that when we’re dealing with unprecedented attacks on democracy maybe people are slow moving at figuring out how they can legally fight back and perhaps it took them that long to put together a legal argument.
Lawyers don’t always instantly know the way to fight back or what the best legal route to take is. Maybe they had to consult a bunch of other lawyers over the course of two weeks and then a week to draw up the paperwork?
The courts take for fucking ever, so of all people you’d think they’d understand that legal stuff isn’t a fast moving process.
I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that when we’re dealing with unprecedented attacks on democracy maybe people are slow moving at figuring out how they can legally fight back and perhaps it took them that long to put together a legal argument.
Part of the judge’s issue was that the court has bigger attacks to deal with than Trump firing these guys faster than he was supposed to.
That isn’t actual a legal argument. If a certain recourse is legal, then it is legal no matter how busy the courts may be.
A court saying they are too busy to enforce the law is declaring themselves useless.
Damage is being done every single day this continues, but the judge berated and threatened those asking for the law to be enforced, because they are busy
She declined to fast track the case like the IGs wanted. It will still be handled in due time. Trump fired the IGs without the required 30 day noticed, and if they were reinstated there’d be nothing to stop him from firing them properly, so fast tracking the case wouldn’t really accomplish much.
Justice delayed is justice denied
She said she was too busy to sanction the lawyer who wasted her time. Not too busy to enforce the law.
Fair enough to the judge, then.
“We have bigger things to deal with” is not why the judge ruled as she did.
“We have bigger things to deal with” is why she decided not to punish the lawyer who waited three weeks to ask for a TRO.
Guess they should have just rushed a half baked arguement faster instead of spending the time trying to make sure the case would set a solid precedent.
Look at the first section I quoted - they presented a half baked argument even moving at that pace.
Imagine how much worse it would have been if they rushed it!
Honestly the judge
dismissingbeing dismissive of the case because Trump could just fire them in 30 days is fucking stupid. Like, it was a cut and dried case to begin with and the judge doesn’t care because they have other cases.She didn’t dismiss the case, she just refused their request to be reinstated while the case proceeds. And it was an emergency request, where the IGs not filing quickly makes it look less like an emergency.
Sorry, her being dismissive of the case. As in talking down to them about.
She was being dismissive because they were extremely unprofessional. That doesn’t mean they will lose in the end. But they failed to show that this is an emergency.
When you ask for a TRO, you are asking for temporary measures due to an emergency. They aren’t your last word, you are expected to follow up later with your full argument.
This is equivalent to asking your teacher for an extension three weeks after the assignment was due. A complete fail.
Gotta love the way they wreck the system in a matter of days, maybe even hours, and the only recourse is to grind slowly through the overworked court system after the damage is done.
