Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
***Breaking *** Appeals Court Upholds Judge Boasberg's Ruling (Original Post) DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2025 OP
Link below Maeve Mar 2025 #1
+1 dalton99a Mar 2025 #8
Good thing the Courts are open and the focus... yowzayowzayowza Mar 2025 #2
Exactly yowzaX3! Like Sen Schumer Cha Mar 2025 #10
I agree, but.... paleotn Mar 2025 #11
Certainly not my first "stink" round these parts. n/t yowzayowzayowza Mar 2025 #12
And Chief Justice Roberts came out against Boasberg's impeachment... ananda Mar 2025 #3
Chief Justice is administrator of the entire judicial system bucolic_frolic Mar 2025 #9
K&R! ReRe Mar 2025 #4
Deadline: Legal Blog-Appeals court rules against Trump motion to halt deportations block LetMyPeopleVote Mar 2025 #5
Here is a link to the 93 page opinion LetMyPeopleVote Mar 2025 #6
thanks proud patriot Mar 2025 #7

paleotn

(21,610 posts)
11. I agree, but....
Wed Mar 26, 2025, 05:43 PM
Mar 2025

Last edited Wed Mar 26, 2025, 06:49 PM - Edit history (1)

Be careful. Such posts might cause a "stink" with those who seem to possess "perfect foresight and knowledge."

bucolic_frolic

(54,078 posts)
9. Chief Justice is administrator of the entire judicial system
Wed Mar 26, 2025, 05:39 PM
Mar 2025

Roberts would be Chief Justice for the impeachment trial.

LetMyPeopleVote

(175,080 posts)
5. Deadline: Legal Blog-Appeals court rules against Trump motion to halt deportations block
Wed Mar 26, 2025, 05:21 PM
Mar 2025

The DOJ sought emergency relief from a federal appeals court to let officials summarily deport people under the Alien Enemies Act while litigation continues.



https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/alien-enemies-act-appeals-court-ruling-trump-rcna197867

The D.C. Circuit panel split 2-1 on Wednesday against the administration, with each judge explaining themselves separately. Judges Karen LeCraft Henderson and Patricia Millet, appointed by Presidents George H.W. Bush and Barack Obama respectively, published concurring statements, while Trump appointee Justice Walker wrote a dissent saying the administration was entitled to relief pending appeal, reasoning in part that “sensitive matters of foreign affairs and national security are at stake.”

Henderson wrote that the government wasn’t entitled to relief at this early stage and that Boasberg entered the restraining orders “for a quintessentially valid purpose: to protect its remedial authority long enough to consider the parties’ arguments.” Millet added that the trial judge “has been handling this matter with great expedition and circumspection, and its orders do nothing more than freeze the status quo until weighty and unprecedented legal issues can be addressed through a soon-forthcoming preliminary injunction proceeding.”

Boasberg didn’t order deportations halted across the board; rather, he temporarily constrained Trump’s authority to summarily deport people under the rarely used act. It was invoked three times before in U.S. history, all during declared wars. The government can still deport people under other legal authorities.

Opposing the government’s attempt to upend Boasberg’s orders, plaintiff lawyers with the American Civil Liberties Union wrote ahead of the hearing that Trump’s “invocation of the Act against a gang cannot be squared with the explicit terms of the statute requiring a declared war or invasion by foreign government.”

They called the implications of Trump’s argument “staggering,” writing that “if the President can designate any group as enemy aliens under the Act, and that designation is unreviewable, then there is no limit on who can be sent to a Salvadoran prison, or any limit on how long they will remain there.”

Boasberg is separately examining whether officials deliberately flouted his orders. Trump called for the judge’s impeachment, after which Chief Justice John Roberts issued a rare statement generally condemning such calls, which the president and his allies, including Elon Musk, have made in response to court rulings against the administration.

LetMyPeopleVote

(175,080 posts)
6. Here is a link to the 93 page opinion
Wed Mar 26, 2025, 05:22 PM
Mar 2025

I was amazed and please to see a 93 page set of opinions. There are two separate concurrences in favor of the detainees.
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25870610/order-and-opinion-on-attempt-to-block-stay-on-aea-flights.pdf
Only 21 pages of this opinion are from the dissenting judge. I have not read all of the two concurring opinions ruling the right way but did skim the dissenting opinion.

I listened to the oral arguments in this case. I was NOT impressed with the DOJ attorney. The asshole DOJ attorney argued that the only proper cause of action in this matter would be individual habeas corpus actions filed for each individual detainee in the proper court where such plaintiff/detainee is located. Given that the DOJ/trump administration hid the location of these detainees, this would be impossible to do. This means that since the DOJ was successful in hiding the location of these plaintiffs/detainees and not giving these detainees any due process, these plaintiffs are out of luck and must stay in prison in El Salvador.

If the dissenting judge and the DOJ are correct, then the DOJ is being rewarded by hiding the location of the individual detainees and deporting these people before habeas cases could be filed. I find that position to be repugnant.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»***Breaking *** Appeals C...