Talking Points Memo: New Details Emerge On Trump Administration’s Defiance Of The Courts

Stone Cold Stonewalling

New details about the extent of the Trump administration’s stonewalling in the case of the mistakenly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia were revealed in a court filing Thursday. After six weeks of what was originally supposed to be two weeks of expedited discovery, the government has provided virtually no meaningful discovery responses, Abrego Garcia’s lawyers report.

Normal discovery disputes would not usually be newsworthy, but this comes in the context of a contempt of court inquiry. The administration’s defiance on discovery and the associated gamesmanship cut against its already-dubious claims that it has complied with the order by U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis of Maryland to facilitate Abrego Garcia’s return – an order endorsed and echoed by the Supreme Court.

After the Trump administration late Wednesday asked for an extension of the May 30 deadline by which all discovery is to be completed, Abrego Garcia’s lawyers filed a blistering response demonstrating how little discovery the government has produced so far. It was already clear from public filings that the government had offered witnesses for deposition who had little or no personal knowledge of the facts of the case, in contravention of the judge’s order. The precise details of that defiance are unclear because many filings remain under seal.

The new details show how desultory the government’s document production has been, too. As of two weeks ago, the government had only produced 34 actual documents. In the subsequent two weeks it was given in which to produce rolling discovery, it coughed up a total of one additional partial document, according to Abrego Garcia’s filing.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/morning-memo/new-details-emerge-on-trump-administrations-defiance-of-courts

Talking Points Memo: Trump DOJ Admits It Used Bogus Info In Key Deportation Case

In an important federal case in Massachusetts over whether deportees can be sent to third countries rather than their countries of origin, the Trump administration admitted Friday to a grievous error and managed to compound it in the process.

It’s a bit complicated so let me boil it down to its essentials:

  • Background: A gay Guatemalan national who had a U.S. immigration judge order barring his removal to his home country because he feared continued persecution was instead deported to Mexico in February by the Trump administration, partly on the grounds that he had told ICE that he didn’t fear being sent to Mexico. That was odd because the man, identified only by the initials O.C.G., had previously testified that he had been targeted and raped in Mexico, his lawyers say.
  • Thursday: The Trump DOJ abruptly cancelled the scheduled deposition of an ICE official “whom Defendants previously identified as giving Plaintiff O.C.G. notice of deportation to Mexico and recording his response of lack of fear,” O.C.G.’s lawyers later told the court.
  • Friday: The Trump DOJ filed a “Notice of Errata” admitting that during the judge’s ordered discovery in the case it had been unable to “identify any officer who asked O.C.G. whether he had a fear of return to Mexico.” A key factual element of the Trump administration’s case had evaporated. But it got worse …
  • Sunday: Lawyers for the deportee – who is now in hiding in Guatemala because he fears persecution as a gay man – filed an emergency motion pointing out, among other things, that the government’s filing about its own error revealed the deportees name and other information, further jeopardizing his safety despite a court order anonymizing his identifying information.

Still with me? In the course of admitting its error, the Trump administration outed the gay man who it had wrongfully deported in the first place.

This is what happens when you staff up with a bunch of sycophantic suck-ups and bimbos instead of competent personnel!

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/morning-memo/trump-doj-admits-it-used-bogus-info-in-key-deportation-case

Raw Story: ‘Oof’: Legal experts shocked by Trump DOJ proposal revealed in big Supreme Court hearing

University of Michigan law professor Leah Litman wrote her own comical paraphrasing of U.S. Supreme Court justices’ comments. In one case, she pointed out Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s “partial list of the SCOTUS precedents (4) this order violates.”

Litman then paraphrased Chief Justice John Roberts in her own words.

“Chief: let’s stop this murder, please,” she quipped.

In one exchange, Justice Elena Kagan asked, if they assume this is a completely illegal executive order, how do the courts actually stop it?

Sauer said it would file a class action.

Kagan said that he would then argue that there isn’t a class to certify under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Sauer agreed, so Kagan asked what other options there were.

Sauer suggested every affected individual would sue.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned if Sauer was seriously proposing such an idea.

Litman wrote her own paraphrasing: “Oh dang Elena Kagan ‘assume you’re really f—— wrong and this order is wildly illegal. Are you saying every individual child has to sue to establish their citizenship?'”

Lawyer and journalist at Rewire, Imani Gandy commented, “Every child of undocumented immigrants has to file their own lawsuit. Millions of lawsuits. Makes perfect sense.”

Civil litigator Owen Barcala posted on Bluesky, “This is such a good point, I’m frustrated I didn’t see it. If the gov issues a clearly illegal order that applies to millions and it is losing in every individual case, why would it ever appeal the losses? So what if they can’t enforce it as to a dozen people if they can still do it for millions?”

MSNBC and Just Security legal analyst Adam Klasfeld cited a debate between Sotomayor and Solicitor General John Sauer.

“Sotomayor notes that barring nationwide injunctions, as the Trump admin asks, would mean that courts would be powerless to stop a ‘clearly, indisputably unconstitutional’ act, taking every gun from every citizen. We couldn’t stop that?” Klasfeld posted on Bluesky, quoting the justice.

&c.

https://www.rawstory.com/birthright-citizenship-2672024689

NBC News: Trump admin’s threat to suspend core U.S. legal right sparks outcry, alarm

Stephen “Goebbels” Miller said the president is “actively looking at” suspending the right for people to see a judge if detained in the U.S. Legal scholars say that Congress, not Trump, has that power.

Legal experts and Democrats expressed growing alarm over the weekend that Trump administration officials are openly discussing unilaterally suspending habeas corpus — a bedrock American legal right — without the approval of Congress.

The writ of habeas corpus, which dates back centuries, grants anyone detained in the U.S. the right to see a judge, challenge the government’s evidence against them and present a defense.

But White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen “Goebbels” Miller downplayed its significance on Friday and suggesting that the administration could move to suspend it unilaterally. “That’s an option we’re actively looking at,” “Goebbels” Miller told reporters at the White House.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/legal-experts-habeas-corpus-stephen-miller-rcna206130