#d-c-circuit — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #d-c-circuit, aggregated by home.social.
-
Trump strikes back: President Trump denounces a DC appeals court ruling halting construction of the $400M White House ballroom as "horrendous" and vows an immediate Supreme Court appeal. https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/world/horrendous-trump-decries-court-ruling-halting-white-house-ballroom-construction-ft7mdm4w?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=mastodon #TrumpNews #WhiteHouse #USPolitics #SupremeCourt #DCCircuit
-
Appeals Court Upholds Block Of ICE’s BS ‘Seven Day Notice’ Detention Center Inspection Policy
-
Appeals Court Upholds Block Of ICE’s BS ‘Seven Day Notice’ Detention Center Inspection Policy
-
Perlmutter Tells SCOTUS Trump is Making ‘An Inexcusable Mess’ of Library of Congress Governance – IPWatchdog.com -Patents & Intellectual Property Law
By Eileen McDermott, 7 hours ago
Perlmutter Tells SCOTUS Trump is Making ‘An Inexcusable Mess’ of Library of Congress Governance
“The question here is not whether the Register of Copyrights or the Librarian of Congress has any functions that can be characterized as ‘executive’ for constitutional purposes; it is whether Congress decided to organize the Library as an ‘Executive agency’”.
Photo from article…Two weeks after the Trump administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay an interlocutory injunction issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in September that allowed Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter to return to her post pending her lawsuit against President Donald Trump for allegedly illegally removing her from office, Perlmutter has responded.
In her opposition to the application for a stay, filed on Monday, Perlmutter accused the administration of making “an inexcusable mess of Congress’s plans for the governance of its Library.”
Trump’s application argued that the D.C. appellate court’s injunction represents “another case of improper judicial interference with the President’s power to remove executive officers” and that its “analysis contravenes settled precedent and misconceives the Librarian’s and Register’s legal status.” The powers of the Librarian and Register have been classified as executive by the Supreme Court, said the administration’s brief, “such as the power to issue rules implementing a federal statute, to issue orders in administrative adjudications, and even to conduct foreign relations relating to copyright issues.”
But Perlmutter argued in her opposition that “the question here is not whether the Register of Copyrights or the Librarian of Congress has any functions that can be characterized as ‘executive’ for constitutional purposes; it is whether Congress decided to organize the Library as an ‘Executive agency’—not just for purposes of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 (“FVRA”), 5 U.S.C. § 3345 et seq., but for all of the purposes for which the same definition of “Executive agency” is used in Title 5, 5 U.S.C. § 105.”
Continue/Read Original Article Here: Perlmutter Tells SCOTUS Trump is Making ‘An Inexcusable Mess’ of Library of Congress Governance – IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law Perlmutter Tells SCOTUS Trump is Making ‘An Inexcusable Mess’ of Library of Congress Governance
Tags: "Inexcusable Mess", Copyright, D.C. Circuit, Donald Trump, Intellectual Property, IPWatchdog.com, Library of Congress, Patents, SCOTUS, Shira Perlmutter, Trump, U.S. Congress, U.S. Court of Appeals#inexcusableMess #copyright #dCCircuit #donaldTrump #intellectualProperty #ipwatchdogCom #libraryOfCongress #patents #scotus #shiraPerlmutter #trump #uSCongress #uSCourtOfAppeals
-
Perlmutter Tells SCOTUS Trump is Making ‘An Inexcusable Mess’ of Library of Congress Governance – IPWatchdog.com -Patents & Intellectual Property Law
By Eileen McDermott, 7 hours ago
Perlmutter Tells SCOTUS Trump is Making ‘An Inexcusable Mess’ of Library of Congress Governance
“The question here is not whether the Register of Copyrights or the Librarian of Congress has any functions that can be characterized as ‘executive’ for constitutional purposes; it is whether Congress decided to organize the Library as an ‘Executive agency’”.
Photo from article…Two weeks after the Trump administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay an interlocutory injunction issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in September that allowed Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter to return to her post pending her lawsuit against President Donald Trump for allegedly illegally removing her from office, Perlmutter has responded.
In her opposition to the application for a stay, filed on Monday, Perlmutter accused the administration of making “an inexcusable mess of Congress’s plans for the governance of its Library.”
Trump’s application argued that the D.C. appellate court’s injunction represents “another case of improper judicial interference with the President’s power to remove executive officers” and that its “analysis contravenes settled precedent and misconceives the Librarian’s and Register’s legal status.” The powers of the Librarian and Register have been classified as executive by the Supreme Court, said the administration’s brief, “such as the power to issue rules implementing a federal statute, to issue orders in administrative adjudications, and even to conduct foreign relations relating to copyright issues.”
But Perlmutter argued in her opposition that “the question here is not whether the Register of Copyrights or the Librarian of Congress has any functions that can be characterized as ‘executive’ for constitutional purposes; it is whether Congress decided to organize the Library as an ‘Executive agency’—not just for purposes of the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 (“FVRA”), 5 U.S.C. § 3345 et seq., but for all of the purposes for which the same definition of “Executive agency” is used in Title 5, 5 U.S.C. § 105.”
Continue/Read Original Article Here: Perlmutter Tells SCOTUS Trump is Making ‘An Inexcusable Mess’ of Library of Congress Governance – IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law Perlmutter Tells SCOTUS Trump is Making ‘An Inexcusable Mess’ of Library of Congress Governance
#inexcusableMess #copyright #dCCircuit #donaldTrump #intellectualProperty #ipwatchdogCom #libraryOfCongress #patents #scotus #shiraPerlmutter #trump #uSCongress #uSCourtOfAppeals
-
US Court Rules That Censoring Whole Platforms Like TikTok Protects Free Speech
A DC Circuit court has upheld the governments effort to censor the entirety of TikTok... claiming such a move protects free speech?
Imagine if you would a major television news network that reports the news every day.
#Censorship #LawAndTechnology #News #appeal #court #DC #DCCircuit #ruling #TikTok
-
US Court Rules That Censoring Whole Platforms Like TikTok Protects Free Speech
A DC Circuit court has upheld the governments effort to censor the entirety of TikTok... claiming such a move protects free speech?
Imagine if you would a major television news network that reports the news every day.
#Censorship #LawAndTechnology #News #appeal #court #DC #DCCircuit #ruling #TikTok
-
Now that the opinion is out...
#law #lawfedi #lawyer #dccircuit #CoA #immunity #trump #uspol #politics #uspolitics
-
D.C. Circuit Denies Trump Appeals of Gag Order
The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has denied Trump's request to hear an appeal of the gag order imposed by Judge Tanya Chutkan in the federal election interference case.Team Trump submitted appeal requests to both the three-judge panel who originally heard the appeal as well as the full D.C
https://newsviews.online/2024/01/23/d-c-circuit-denies-trump-appeals-of-gag-order/
#TrumpTrials #DCCircuit #GagOrder -
D.C. Circuit Denies Trump Appeals of Gag Order
The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has denied Trump's request to hear an appeal of the gag order imposed by Judge Tanya Chutkan in the federal election interference case.Team Trump submitted appeal requests to both the three-judge panel who originally heard the appeal as well as the full D.C
https://newsviews.online/2024/01/23/d-c-circuit-denies-trump-appeals-of-gag-order/
#TrumpTrials #DCCircuit #GagOrder -
Excellent recap of the DC Circuit oral arguments on Trump’s immunity claim, as always.
Insight into what the judge’s questions may indicate about their eventual opinions.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-lawfare-podcast/id498897343?i=1000641154964
-
I think Trump's lawyer arguing in favor of immunity has forgotten that, if your strategy is to dazzle 'em with bullshit, you have to bring some actual dazzling bullshit.
#law
#lawfedi
#DCCircuit
#CourtofAppeals
#Trump
#Immunity -
I think Trump's lawyer arguing in favor of immunity has forgotten that, if your strategy is to dazzle 'em with bullshit, you have to bring some actual dazzling bullshit.
#law
#lawfedi
#DCCircuit
#CourtofAppeals
#Trump
#Immunity -
Donezo, I believe.
All three seemed quite hostile to the immunity claim.
One judge clearly had an appetite for an alternative holding if they rule against Trump on the jurisdictional question of interlocutory appeal. Another judge didn't seem as convinced though, noting it would be an advisory opinion.
Can't wait! Expect the decision to come down quickly.
-
Trump's Lawyer Concludes.
-
Trump's Lawyer Concludes.
-
Court: What if there is no impeachment proceeding occurs? It's a judgment call if it's even brought?
Trump's Lawyer: Then the official acts are immune. Period.
-
Court: What if there is no impeachment proceeding occurs? It's a judgment call if it's even brought?
Trump's Lawyer: Then the official acts are immune. Period.
-
Court: Let's do a hypothetical. A president is charged with incitement. Impeached and convicted. A prosecution could be brought? Could same or related conduct, even if official, be prosecuted?
Trump's Lawyer: (I think he said yes, but it went quick).
-
Court: Let's do a hypothetical. A president is charged with incitement. Impeached and convicted. A prosecution could be brought? Could same or related conduct, even if official, be prosecuted?
Trump's Lawyer: (I think he said yes, but it went quick).
-
Court: Let me try again. (sigh - repeats question). Yes or No.
Trump's Lawyer is really trying super hard not to answer.
-
Court: Let me try again. (sigh - repeats question). Yes or No.
Trump's Lawyer is really trying super hard not to answer.
-
Court: If Trump had been convicted after his 2nd impeachment, then this prosecution would be entirely proper?
Trump's Lawyer: If same or similar conduct.
Court: Is that a yes?
Trump's Lawyer: Yes-ish.
Court: So it would be proper if convicted?
Trump's Lawyer: Well there are other problems...
Court: Under the Impeachment and Judgment Clause only.
Trump's Lawyer: "A" prosecution could be brought.
-
Court: If Trump had been convicted after his 2nd impeachment, then this prosecution would be entirely proper?
Trump's Lawyer: If same or similar conduct.
Court: Is that a yes?
Trump's Lawyer: Yes-ish.
Court: So it would be proper if convicted?
Trump's Lawyer: Well there are other problems...
Court: Under the Impeachment and Judgment Clause only.
Trump's Lawyer: "A" prosecution could be brought.
-
Trump Lawyer: The best reading is there needs to be impeachment and removal. So if another charge unrelated to the impeachment and removal, immunity applies.
-
Trump Lawyer: The best reading is there needs to be impeachment and removal. So if another charge unrelated to the impeachment and removal, immunity applies.
-
Court: If you are requiring for impeachment and removal, and there is a process for one set of crimes, and the president is removed or resigns, and a prosecution for other crimes, is there immunity for those other crimes?
-
Court: If you are requiring for impeachment and removal, and there is a process for one set of crimes, and the president is removed or resigns, and a prosecution for other crimes, is there immunity for those other crimes?
-
Trump Lawyer: There is no frightening future here except the idea that the chief political opponent of Trump is prosecuting him. Cycles of recrimination.
-
Trump Lawyer: There is no frightening future here except the idea that the chief political opponent of Trump is prosecuting him. Cycles of recrimination.
-
Trump Lawyer: A telling indication in the indictment is that all the acts were conducted in office and prior to Trump leaving. So they are clearly likely all official acts.
-
Trump Lawyer: A telling indication in the indictment is that all the acts were conducted in office and prior to Trump leaving. So they are clearly likely all official acts.
-
Trump Lawyer back on.
That's a voice I can recognize.
-
Trump Lawyer back on.
That's a voice I can recognize.
-
-
-
SC Lawyer: If there is impeachment-removal condition, then we would have seen some indication in founding documents. There is *no* indication this was ever a plausible reading. All that Hamilton ever said was that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted, and can only be removed by the civil impeachment process, and then prosecuted upon not being sitting president.
-
SC Lawyer: If there is impeachment-removal condition, then we would have seen some indication in founding documents. There is *no* indication this was ever a plausible reading. All that Hamilton ever said was that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted, and can only be removed by the civil impeachment process, and then prosecuted upon not being sitting president.
-
Court: If we determine there is no impeachment-removal condition precedent to criminal prosecution, does that answer this question? (going back to the Trump Lawyer catch-22 on conceding some avenue for criminal prosecution exists).
-
Court: If we determine there is no impeachment-removal condition precedent to criminal prosecution, does that answer this question? (going back to the Trump Lawyer catch-22 on conceding some avenue for criminal prosecution exists).
-
Court is asking about the effects of various rulings and remands, got kind of weedy.
SC Lawyer essentially argues it would create a mess and tons of additional litigation.
-
Court is asking about the effects of various rulings and remands, got kind of weedy.
SC Lawyer essentially argues it would create a mess and tons of additional litigation.
-
Court: Is the motive and intent not part of the criminal charges?
SC Lawyer: Yes, which is why we shouldn't do the Fitzgerald analysis here. That question is addressed in the criminal trial.
-
Court: Is the motive and intent not part of the criminal charges?
SC Lawyer: Yes, which is why we shouldn't do the Fitzgerald analysis here. That question is addressed in the criminal trial.
-
Court: Should we consider motive / intent in the analysis of official acts?
SC Lawyer: No, since the underlying act is the same.
-
Court: Should we consider motive / intent in the analysis of official acts?
SC Lawyer: No, since the underlying act is the same.
-
SC Lawyer: What kind of world are we living in if we are living in a world where the president can order seal team six to assassinate his political opponent and then *resigns* before impeachment and removal. Completely immune? This should weigh extraordinarily heavily in the court's decision making.
-
SC Lawyer: What kind of world are we living in if we are living in a world where the president can order seal team six to assassinate his political opponent and then *resigns* before impeachment and removal. Completely immune? This should weigh extraordinarily heavily in the court's decision making.
-
Court: Do you then think it should be a case-by-case analysis?
SC Lawyer: An across the board rule that the president can be subject to criminal prosecution. In a particular case, there could be extraordinary circumstances where immunity may be invoked. But this Court does not need to recognize that *here*. Can reserve that question until a later case.
-
Court: Do you then think it should be a case-by-case analysis?
SC Lawyer: An across the board rule that the president can be subject to criminal prosecution. In a particular case, there could be extraordinary circumstances where immunity may be invoked. But this Court does not need to recognize that *here*. Can reserve that question until a later case.
-
SC Lawyer: Drone strike liability (per the Obama argument) might implicate the kind of discretion that this Court may find immunity for, since it is an in the moment decision like that and not subject to time for consideration.
-
SC Lawyer: Drone strike liability (per the Obama argument) might implicate the kind of discretion that this Court may find immunity for, since it is an in the moment decision like that and not subject to time for consideration.
-
Court: How do we prevent opening the floodgates when criminal prosecution is likely to be necessarily political?
SC Lawyer: The criminal process has safeguards and is explicitly not to be political. The floodgate argument is a bit overstated. Nixon and past cases were civil, but it was also about potential criminal conduct. The assumption of criminal prosecution has continued through to the present.
-
Court: How do we prevent opening the floodgates when criminal prosecution is likely to be necessarily political?
SC Lawyer: The criminal process has safeguards and is explicitly not to be political. The floodgate argument is a bit overstated. Nixon and past cases were civil, but it was also about potential criminal conduct. The assumption of criminal prosecution has continued through to the present.
-
SC Lawyer: Following the law is not a discretionary act. Compliance is not optional even under the take care clause.
-
Court: Let's turn to Marbury.
SC Lawyer: Certainly doesn't erect an unreviewable power to the presidency. Youngstown (steel seizure case) is a great example. Court comes in and reviews the presidential action.
-
SC Lawyer: We would say yes, hypothetical jurisdiction may exist, and yes, you can do it and should if needed.
Court: Is that not an advisory opinion?